Anika Wells, the new Communications Minister of Australia, is holding her ground against tech giants. She is against their pushback of the country’s new social media ban for children under 16. Wells, a mom of three young children, related to the BBC her difficulties in enforcing any limits on screen time. We appreciated her comments about the difficulty of managing social media usage in her home. She added that her husband mostly takes on this role because she is often on the road with her travel-heavy schedule.
The Australian federal government legislated the social media ban as part of its broader promise to improve online protections for children. Wells struck a defiant tone, asserting that she is undaunted by threats from large technology companies opposed to the bill. She feels these companies are right to be concerned about Australia’s approach. It could be a harbinger of a larger wave in which countries around the world follow suit and start limiting teens’ access to social media platforms.
Wells says he and other advocates are ready for possible counteractions from Washington in response to Australia’s new law. Her administration is focused on innovating and iterating new policy to improve government and public policy. Over the next two years, they will study the ban and analyze its effects. This review will be highly influential in determining the course of the ban, especially going forward. It will pose a major risk to children’s online safety.
“I am not intimidated by big tech because I understand the moral imperative of what we’re doing.” – Anika Wells
Wells pointed out that Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner has already been subpoenaed to testify before the US Congress. This is an exciting time in the online safety debate. This should ring alarm bells about increasing international pressure on the adequacy of online safety measures, and the effectiveness of existing regulations. She pointed to the pushback regarding the online gaming exemption from her social media prohibition. In particular, she pointed out that Roblox has rung alarm bells over children’s safety on their platform.
Wells’ admonition comes in the context of several U.S. states that have tried to pass similar legislation. Advancing these efforts have had high-profile losses in the courts. She said she was immensely proud that Australia had been a trailblazer in this field.
“We’re pleased to be the first, we’re proud to be the first, and we stand ready to help any other jurisdictions who seek to do these things.” – Anika Wells
The minister really needs to appreciate the kind of message sent when you prioritize corporate interests over public safety. She claimed that Australia’s method is demonstrative of the responsibility that legislators need to their citizens.
“We are very much concerned with doing our duty to Australians and Australian taxpayers who pay us to look after good public policy.” – Anika Wells
Wells’s message was clear and forceful, but it was equally clear that when public safety is at stake, policymakers have to act—and act quickly. He insisted, “If your operating model is unsafe and people are dying because of it, you can bet public policy makers are going to react to that.” This statement rings true of her commitment to being proactive, rather than reactive in a fast-moving digital world.
A mother herself, Wells recognizes the burdens that parents face in trying to protect their kids online. She thinks the ban allows parents to better protect their children in an increasingly hostile online environment. It gives them the tools and knowledge they need to keep their kids from coming to harm.
“You can’t parent an algorithm and this is giving parents another weapon in their arsenal.” – Anika Wells
Wells called the ban a “treatment plan” not a cure. He pointed out that policies must adapt as we learn more about how children can stay safe online, and how technology continues to evolve, in turn affecting how children interact with it.
“This isn’t a cure, it’s a treatment plan, and treatment plans will always evolve as we can adapt and address harm and see what works and what doesn’t.” – Anika Wells
She made comparisons to other age-restricted activities such as drinking alcohol. She noted that 100% of individuals under 18 commit illegal acts and therefore education and parental engagement must be part of any regulatory structure.
“In the same way that people under 18 aren’t allowed to drink alcohol in Australia, there will be people today under 18 that drink alcohol… they may even be supported in doing that by their parents.” – Anika Wells