Who hasn't heard the saying “if it ain't broke, why fix it”? The fact is, a lot of the time things have been “broke” and needed fixing but as a group, humans generally take solace in the status quo and defer change.
But had lawmakers over the centuries not stood up for what was right, we would still have some mind-numbingly dangerous practices in place.
Did you know murder was only made illegal in the US in 1794, and even then it was still legal to kill slaves as they were considered a person's property?
Shocking isn't it?
You know what else was shocking?
When Coca-Cola came on the scene in 1886, it had two major ingredients: caffeine and cocaine.
Meth was used to treat a number of ailments, including alcoholism, depression, narcolepsy and hay fever until 1970.
Domestic violence was not considered worthy of legal intervention until the 1970s.
Drink-driving was fairly widespread in Australia until random breath testing was introduced in the 70s in Victoria, followed by NSW in the early 80s. An editorial in The Australian newspaper in 1982 called the move “an attack on freedom”. I wonder if the paper did another editorial applauding the move when the road toll over the 1982-83 Christmas and new year period was reduced by half.
And how about this one. When the US Postal Service began in 1913, a four-year old girl was mailed to her grandparents for a visit. It was cheaper than the train fare. (The postmaster general did ban the practice when he found out, thankfully.) Ask yourself if you would mail your precious four-year-old to another city - or let them run around in a backyard with an unfenced pool or ride in a car without a child seat, for that matter.
It is hard now to imagine why there was resistance to any of these safety measures back in the past.
It makes sense that if we discover something is detrimental to the physical or mental wellbeing of our population, especially our kids, it is beholden on the generation charged with leading the country to try to fix the problem.
When it comes to children, the adults in their world must do everything we can to protect them. As any parent knows, sometimes decisions we have to make are not popular but are necessary.
That is the reason for the Albanese Government's legislation to set 16 as the minimum age for access to social media.
Minister for Communications, Michelle Rowland, is to be applauded for driving this world-leading initiative.
In developing the minimum age policy, Minister Rowland listened to parents and carers, experts and industry - and importantly, to young people.
This legislation is not about punishing or isolating Australian kids. It is to give them a chance to grow up free from addictive algorithms, trafficking of their personal data, the anxiety inducing fear of missing out. It's hard enough being a kid these days, without the added burden of random influencers and infinite scrolling, sleep disturbance and impacts on learning.
Put plainly, parents should never have to bury their kids as a result of the impact of social media. It's a type of hell young teenagers, with rapidly developing brains, should do without.
The jury is in, the problems with social media being an avenue for exploitation of young people has been proven beyond reasonable doubt by global research. The Australian National University's GENERATION study surveys 3500 high school students from some 300 schools across the country. The ANU recently released data from the study that related to a participant's “life satisfaction”. The mean score was just 6.2 out of 10 and it was found that the use of many of the mainstream social media platforms means poorer life satisfaction.
The law is a valuable ally in the fight to keep our kids safe.
Governments, parents, educators around the world have scrambled to play catch up on how to handle an ever-changing and ever-growing social media landscape.
Let's not sugarcoat it, our kids have suffered from inaction.
There is no dispute that social media can benefit young people who need to access crucial supports or want to build online communities to connect with others who share their interests, dreams and fears.
Rule-making powers within the new legislation allow the carve-out categories of services and apps that may operate in a similar way to social media but are beneficial to young people. YouTube, headspace, Kids Helpline and Google Classroom, for example, will be excluded from the new law.
Importantly, this law places the duty of care on social media platforms - not parents or kids - to take reasonable steps to prevent people under 16 from having accounts on their platforms.
Over the next 12 months, the Government will work closely with industry and experts to ensure the minimum age is effectively implemented.
Partnering with young people and organisations who represent them will be central to the implementation phase.
The penalty for companies found to be wilfully breaching these rules is not small.
They may face fines of up to $50 million.
Australia should be incredibly proud of this legislation.
We are leading the world, just as we did with seatbelts in the 1970s. Just as we did with John Howard's gun regulation in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre.
Good government - regardless of political stripe - is about facing up to difficult issues, carefully evaluating the evidence and then committing to real reform that is in the best interests of the community.
Expecting Australian children and their parents to fend for themselves against global big tech is simply not fair nor right. And now, the Albanese Government is doing something about it.
The world is watching us, parents everywhere are hoping these laws are effective, so they have a road map for protecting our kids.
Originally published in The West Australian Monday 16 December 2024.
