Here is my submission. Anyone is also welcome to use any part of this!
Dear Secretary
Submission on the Social-Media Minimum Age Bill 2024
I write to express my absolute opposition to any passage of the Social-Media Minimum Age Bill.
Certainly, there are concerns with children and internet access with regards to certain sites and there is opportunity for children to be taken advantage of. Certainly, it is optimal for children to limit the duration of their online time. However, this bill does not provide an acceptable solution; it blocks the access of children (and potentially families and adults) to legitimate education and valuable social networks, and will create many problems, including being a gross overreach of government responsibility and jurisdiction.
1. By requiring that children have to prove they are not younger than 16 to access social media sites, effectively all users (including visitors) in Australia will have to prove they are older than 16. This bill will require digital signatures for all users, potentially with verification needed for every new access! Clearly this is more about tracking and controlling internet usage and access of Australians than it is about protecting children.
2. There has been totally inadequate time for this bill to be reviewed and assessed, let alone a proper assessment of how it could even be fairly and adequately implemented. Why is the government trying to railroad in a bill that is so poorly defined? Much more study, debate, and vigorous public consultation is required!
a. Rushed legislation without proper public consultation is historically flawed legislation. The consultation period must be extended by a fair and reasonable period to enable widespread feedback. I would suggest 3 months, not the current one day. In what possible context could this be acceptable and appropriate!
b. There is no clarity with respect to how the verifying process will work for users over 16. This is particularly worrying at a time when privacy concerns, digital theft and lack of trust in government programs is at an all-time high. Regardless of promises of security and privacy, history has shown that these promises are not worth anything.
3. Social media can be a remarkably effective positive tool for children when used well and appropriately. A blanket ban such as this proposed will cut access from legitimate and valuable use, which may include support sites which provide lifelines to the vulnerable.
a. The responsibility for the online activity of children should be from parents or guardians. There are already ample parental control tools available. This bill diminishes the traditional and proven role of family. Public education on available tools and their use can only be beneficial.
4. In some cases such vulnerable people (trafficked / abused people / suicidal, etc) may not be willing to access support if they have to reveal their personal details / sign in digitally. Children needing to access such sites will simply not be allowed if they are under 16!
5. Social media sites can be educational and are used as study tools. Will children only be allowed to have such information that their schools provide them, and no other? This is totally unacceptable. Children (and families) need to have access to broad sources of information. It this “1984”: where the government is the sole source of approved information, and no one is permitted to see or know anything except the approved narrative. The “official narratives” have been proven wrong many times. Blocking access to alternative views is anti-knowledge and anti-democratic.
6. What happens for families or public sites where there are multiple users for a single computer. Will every single new user have to sign in and sign out?
7. The government should be pushing the use of filters at the Internet Service Provider level to block high risk sites/sources for children and others that may be vulnerable. The Government should work with social media platforms to determine strategies where offenders can be quickly identified.
a. Social Media groups are clearly experts with algorithms, these algorithms should be used to seek and identify offenders.
b. Penalizing services providers is a very confrontational and aggressive oppositional approach, rather than working with them in a mutually beneficial manner.
8. The government should establish an easy to access reporting system so that parents and guardians can report any predatory sites or behaviors on-line. If this is promoted throughout the community, then it will encourage the entire community to be vigilant and active in protecting vulnerable groups. It is possible to protect children with respect to online activity without the restrictions imposed in this bill. Restricting access is not the answer.
In summary, this bill represents a gross and totally unacceptable government overreach! There are other ways to ensure positive and safe social media for children use than this strong-armed aggressive approach that will be highly inconvenient, and will restrict access to valid information and support, including for children and vulnerable persons.
This bill needs to be rejected and stopped in its tracks!
I am getting so tired of endlessly sending petitions but we keep going we have to WE KNOW FROM SCRIPTURE THESE THINGS WILL HAPPEN WE SEE THE 666 MARK OF THE BEAST BEING SET UP AS IN REVELATION 13 WE KNOW WE ARE IN THE TIMES OF YESHUA THE MESSIAH RETURNING THIS TIME TO JUDGE THE BOOK OF REVELATION DEPICTS TERRIFYING JUDGEMENTS ON A WORLD THAT REJECTS MESSIAH OUR ONLY HOPE IS TRUSTING IN YESHUA AND HIS LOVE FOR US
Thank you so much Meryl, this is an incredible submission 👏🙏 so I simply cut and pasted the entire thing and sent it in just now to the address you provided. I also posted it in several freedom groups that I belong to asking them to do the same .
Thanks so much! We are the squeaky wheel and I would not be surprised to see that 10,000-20,000 submissions were sent in even though we only had 24 hours' notice to do so. If the Senators ignore this obvious disapproval of the Australian people, it will be obvious that they do not work for us.
Here is my submission. Anyone is also welcome to use any part of this!
Dear Secretary
Submission on the Social-Media Minimum Age Bill 2024
I write to express my absolute opposition to any passage of the Social-Media Minimum Age Bill.
Certainly, there are concerns with children and internet access with regards to certain sites and there is opportunity for children to be taken advantage of. Certainly, it is optimal for children to limit the duration of their online time. However, this bill does not provide an acceptable solution; it blocks the access of children (and potentially families and adults) to legitimate education and valuable social networks, and will create many problems, including being a gross overreach of government responsibility and jurisdiction.
1. By requiring that children have to prove they are not younger than 16 to access social media sites, effectively all users (including visitors) in Australia will have to prove they are older than 16. This bill will require digital signatures for all users, potentially with verification needed for every new access! Clearly this is more about tracking and controlling internet usage and access of Australians than it is about protecting children.
2. There has been totally inadequate time for this bill to be reviewed and assessed, let alone a proper assessment of how it could even be fairly and adequately implemented. Why is the government trying to railroad in a bill that is so poorly defined? Much more study, debate, and vigorous public consultation is required!
a. Rushed legislation without proper public consultation is historically flawed legislation. The consultation period must be extended by a fair and reasonable period to enable widespread feedback. I would suggest 3 months, not the current one day. In what possible context could this be acceptable and appropriate!
b. There is no clarity with respect to how the verifying process will work for users over 16. This is particularly worrying at a time when privacy concerns, digital theft and lack of trust in government programs is at an all-time high. Regardless of promises of security and privacy, history has shown that these promises are not worth anything.
3. Social media can be a remarkably effective positive tool for children when used well and appropriately. A blanket ban such as this proposed will cut access from legitimate and valuable use, which may include support sites which provide lifelines to the vulnerable.
a. The responsibility for the online activity of children should be from parents or guardians. There are already ample parental control tools available. This bill diminishes the traditional and proven role of family. Public education on available tools and their use can only be beneficial.
4. In some cases such vulnerable people (trafficked / abused people / suicidal, etc) may not be willing to access support if they have to reveal their personal details / sign in digitally. Children needing to access such sites will simply not be allowed if they are under 16!
5. Social media sites can be educational and are used as study tools. Will children only be allowed to have such information that their schools provide them, and no other? This is totally unacceptable. Children (and families) need to have access to broad sources of information. It this “1984”: where the government is the sole source of approved information, and no one is permitted to see or know anything except the approved narrative. The “official narratives” have been proven wrong many times. Blocking access to alternative views is anti-knowledge and anti-democratic.
6. What happens for families or public sites where there are multiple users for a single computer. Will every single new user have to sign in and sign out?
7. The government should be pushing the use of filters at the Internet Service Provider level to block high risk sites/sources for children and others that may be vulnerable. The Government should work with social media platforms to determine strategies where offenders can be quickly identified.
a. Social Media groups are clearly experts with algorithms, these algorithms should be used to seek and identify offenders.
b. Penalizing services providers is a very confrontational and aggressive oppositional approach, rather than working with them in a mutually beneficial manner.
8. The government should establish an easy to access reporting system so that parents and guardians can report any predatory sites or behaviors on-line. If this is promoted throughout the community, then it will encourage the entire community to be vigilant and active in protecting vulnerable groups. It is possible to protect children with respect to online activity without the restrictions imposed in this bill. Restricting access is not the answer.
In summary, this bill represents a gross and totally unacceptable government overreach! There are other ways to ensure positive and safe social media for children use than this strong-armed aggressive approach that will be highly inconvenient, and will restrict access to valid information and support, including for children and vulnerable persons.
This bill needs to be rejected and stopped in its tracks!
Excellent submission, Sally! Really top notch!
Thank you Meryl, without your template I never would have gotten it done!
Mine's sent in now.
Mine is done also! https://substack.com/home/post/p-151999981?utm_medium=email&utm_content=post
Done and dusted...let's hope they get overwhelmed with petitioners discrediting this abhorrent Bill.
I am getting so tired of endlessly sending petitions but we keep going we have to WE KNOW FROM SCRIPTURE THESE THINGS WILL HAPPEN WE SEE THE 666 MARK OF THE BEAST BEING SET UP AS IN REVELATION 13 WE KNOW WE ARE IN THE TIMES OF YESHUA THE MESSIAH RETURNING THIS TIME TO JUDGE THE BOOK OF REVELATION DEPICTS TERRIFYING JUDGEMENTS ON A WORLD THAT REJECTS MESSIAH OUR ONLY HOPE IS TRUSTING IN YESHUA AND HIS LOVE FOR US
I know how you feel. That brick wall is getting softer as our heads get harder though. We are close to breaking through and that will feel SO GOOD!
These petitions are having an effect. They are a drag to keep writing but they are so worth it. Please keep doing them!
Thank you so much Meryl, this is an incredible submission 👏🙏 so I simply cut and pasted the entire thing and sent it in just now to the address you provided. I also posted it in several freedom groups that I belong to asking them to do the same .
Thanks so much! We are the squeaky wheel and I would not be surprised to see that 10,000-20,000 submissions were sent in even though we only had 24 hours' notice to do so. If the Senators ignore this obvious disapproval of the Australian people, it will be obvious that they do not work for us.
Great work, Meryl
Great submission. Just submitted my objection too.
Thank you. submitted!
Well written, I have submitted also