As previously noted, I have always been proud of the fact that journalists were amongst the earliest adopters of the new IT.
David Porter
I have also been the co-parent of several children, who in turn have been and are avid users of computers, online games and the multiple other ways young – as well as older people – have embraced accessing the cyber universe.
However, the latest move by our bigger neighbour Australia, must at the least cause some of our politicians to seriously consider evaluating the impact and potential benefits of the Australian action.
As I write, New Zealand politicians are currently too busy trying to position their parties to advantage for the next general election to address this issue. But I would not be surprised to see a number of parties manoeuvring to replicate the Australian actions.
Our neighbour has gone out on a limb and implemented what is being reported as a world-first ban on allowing access to the internet for children and young teenagers. Stirred by multiple stories from across the country of the time young people are spending online, and the potential and actual damage that can be caused, Australia has opted to crack down on youth access.
Now accounts held by users under 16 must be removed on apps that include TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Kick, Twitch and Threads.
Dismissing social media
I do not doubt that our canny teenagers will attempt and sometimes succeed in finding ways around the ban. However, Australia’s move to shift the focus onto the internet access providers is a shrewd one. No longer can the companies who profit most from providing access, slough responsibility off on the users. The interesting aspect of the ban is that it imposes responsibility on the suppliers of the various forms of internet access. Platforms that do not comply risk hefty fines.
The owners of the internet access portals are expected to take steps this month to remove accounts held by users under 16 years of age in Australia and prevent those teens from registering new accounts.
Internet companies have long proffered their own interpretation of the phase “If we build it they will come” (derived from the film Field of Dreams, where it originally referred to the spiritual return of a long dead sportsman.) Certainly, much of the conspicuous consumption we see in the world derives from that basic concept.
Many readers of The News are very aware of the extent to which the internet has penetrated our lives. And for those of us still engaged in rearing children, there are undeniable and not yet answered questions about the penetration of the internet into our lives.
The Australian ban has caused millions of children and teenagers to lose access to their accounts. However, the Guardian reported that there had some “teething problems” with the ban’s implementation.
Children have reportedly spent the past few weeks undertaking age assurance checks, swapping phone numbers and preparing for their accounts to be deactivated. Guardian Australia has received several reports of those under 16 passing the facial age assurance tests, but the government has flagged it is not expecting the ban will be perfect from day one.
I do fear that as we move towards further access to the internet, we may risk diminishing our abilities to talk with one another. That, in my own experience, remains the best way of communicating with our children.
