The National Party have proposed a bill to ban social media for under 16 year olds - following Australia's lead.
But do parents really need legislative support with things like this? And how much help is really needed?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
You're listening to the Weekend Collective podcast from News Talk SEDB,
Double Doubles, Dakers, clam Jasus Spades, Jasus Spades.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
No, I'm going to lose the US way I like it,
lady A, Welcome back to the Weekend Collective. This is
the Parent Squad. I'm Tim Beveridge. And by the way,
that is yes, that is Motorhead the Ace of Spades.
You know what, we just played that too because one
night and one of my talkback shows, I was talking
(00:48):
about I need to go out with some hard rock
and I put the text call out there. I said,
what what are some hard rock themes I could go
out with? And h this was one of them. And
I played it and I got so many text things.
I'm just loving it. I'm not sure it's the greatest
introduction to the Parent Squad, but actually it's music. Anyway. Anyway,
there we go. There's a little bit of motor Head.
I will happily take texts from anyone who wants to
(01:11):
recommend a good old classic, get your head banging rock
number to get into every hour, and I will take
a note of them all as I have from my
last time I requested it. Anyway, as I say that,
what's the name of the lead singer, is it? I
can't remember? Actually anyway, that's motor Head as to pay
Let's get into it. This is the parent squad and
(01:32):
look there is we want to talk about a recent
piece of news. I'll introduce my esteemed guest in just
a moment. We want to talk about a recent piece
of news which you will have caught up if you
follow the news at all, that the National Party, not
the government. Please note, the National Party have got a
bill that's gone into the biscuit tin. Such a quaint mechanism,
isn't it to propose? It's basically the proposing banning social
(01:57):
media for under sixteen year olds and it is following
essentially Australia's lead who have got a Lauren which is
doing exactly that. We don't know how it's going to
play out and everything, but that's the way Australia. Australia
is going. And I don't know what you think. Is
it a good idea for the government to actually have
a law around banning social media. It's worth reminding us
(02:22):
Alves as I say, people say, why is it just
not something that's going to be debated right now, and
it's because it's not a government bill, it's the National
Party bill. Because act don't support it. I don't know
if New Zealand first do, but should they. Here's my
quick take on it, and then I'll introduce my guest
because I like to keep everyone in the suspense a
little bit. As a parent, I would love them to
(02:47):
introduce a ban for social media. And some people say, well,
it's not enforceable, but there are lots of things in
life that aren't enforceable. Everyone breaks the rules, everyone breaks
social norms. It's not legal to drink, to buy alcohol
when you're not eighteen, people get away with it, kids
get access to alcohol. But the law is there, and
I think in this case the law actually supports parents
who probably love to ban social media. I'm not sure
(03:10):
I'm one hundred percent in favor of it, but that's
sitting on the fence. But broadly speaking, i'd love to
be able to be able to say to my kids, Okay,
you can't have social media. I don't care if your
friends have got it. Guess what, it's against the law.
But it's not ever as straightforward as we'd like it
to be. As it. But you might recall that there
was a time when the when there was a suggestion
(03:31):
that some schools would ban kids having access to cell phones.
And I did talk back on this and people like
it's so hard to enforce and all that sort of stuff.
All of a sudden, the government passed the law kids
don't have phones, and schools, of course they still access
and they lose and all that sort of thing. But
by and large it's been a big success. So I
want your calls on eight hundred and eighty ten to eighty,
and mischievously I've kept them waiting this long just because
(03:53):
I think it's nice to build up a little bit
of suspense because.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Always likely to take you because you're embarrassed about me.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Ladies and gentlemen, it's John Cahn, as my my I
don't know how to define you apart from parenting and
expert all round, good guy. Anyway, how are you?
Speaker 3 (04:08):
I'm well enough, and I wish I wish I was
as you described me, an expert, because I'm scratching my
head over this bill. I see sixty six percent of
parents are in favor of that.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
That's quite a lot.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
And I'm and so I am sixty six percent in
favor of it myself. But I can see a substantial.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Representative you are represented.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
I don't know what I represent, but I can see
all sorts of fish hooks and problems for a bill
like this. I can understand the motive because social media
it's well, first of all, let's just I reckon, it's
the biggest social change in our lifetime. It's like TV
being when TV was introduced, it was like the onset
(04:51):
of radio. It's where kids are living. And this is
the thing that a simple band won't change. It's where
their friends are. But the number one use of social
media that your kids put their phone is to connect
with their mates. And that's what they and that's why
the you know, Snapchat and TikTok and Instagram and YouTube
(05:14):
are the four biggest ones used by our teenagers and
two of them are primarily just to connect to their mates.
So this is the this is the big problem when
that's such a huge thing for our teenage.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Well, of course their mates won't be able to have
it either, so it's not a question that we're going
to bound it for just the kids who don't have it.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
So on your logical mind, I admire that.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
I know, I do try and a little bit of
logic from time to time, because you usually it's just
rabbit emotion and opinion. But so, for instance, my kids,
and that I don't like to talk too specifically about
my kids. They don't have social media accounts because they
are actually I think too young for the guidelines of
when you can have our own account, and they've been
(05:56):
actually haven't been arguing so much for it because the
medium they used to connect with each other is WhatsApp,
and so they can have status updates where they change
that and it might say something about what they're doing
with their day, but generally they just message each other,
as opposed to the Instagram sort of life where you
are putting up photos of this and you're trying to
(06:17):
live your best life and you're waiting to see how
many people like see and in fact, this is the
other side of it. One do you support the government
stepping in when it comes to access to social media?
But what is it about social media that I think
is the dangerous bit? And dangerous bit Okay, language choice,
I could use other words, but to me, it's that
(06:38):
hanging your self esteem on how many people have engaged
with your post, how many people are liking it, and
the way you represent your life, and the addictive nature
of having to go back to have I got any
more likes? Have I got any more? You know?
Speaker 3 (06:50):
By the ways, it's a good time for you to
do a plug for your Facebook page.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Actually, funny thing is Facebook for me. I don't know
where it's gone. But the other thing I just mentioned
by in support of this or just as part of
the discussion, is I I had a guest on my
show a couple of weeks ago who was involved in
Silicon Valley, back at the time when Zuckerberg and all
those guys were starting to make their money. And he's
been to Mark zuck Atberger's house and there are no
(07:16):
devices allowed in his house at all, partly probably because
he doesn't want I don't know whether there's some sort
of piracy thing, but it was mainly because he doesn't
allow his kids to access social media.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
And yeah, that's the same man who has in recent
days removed even fact checking from Facebook.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Now.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
By the way, Facebook is probably not a huge part
of this discussion because it's only used such a boomer discussion.
It's one in eight teenagers still use it, but it's
certainly not in the front ranking of the things that
teenagers use.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
See.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
This is part of also the problem when we're thinking
about social media, what are we actually meaning? Are we
talking about those ones that they use just to keep
on talking to their friends, like Snapchat, which is you know,
by and large, it seems to be relatively safe. I
know there was a big fluffle about it when it
first came out, but it seems to be something that
(08:12):
allows for I think they use the term ephemeral communication.
They communicate it's gone. It's not as if it's lingering
around to cash them out, or is it like Instagram,
like you say, which actually defines their life. The TikTok
is the biggest growing one, and they are just endlessly
doing tiktoks of themselves and putting filters on to make
(08:34):
themselves look better. In fact, most teenagers prefer their online
image to their actual image. Their avatar. Their self online
is who they see themselves as rather than the teenager
they look at in the mirror, so it's shaped who
they are, and this is where it starts to be pernicious.
I think when it's been when you're being shaped from
(08:56):
the outside and you're shaping yourself in such an unreal way.
So yeah, I really do think there needs to be
some brakespit on it. I just wonder whether this's currently
just is going to do much.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
The broader question is actually around what role governments should
play in helping us raise our kids. So this is
a big issue mental health and social media. And I
don't think there be many people who wouldn't hear you know,
teenagers mentally our social media, how do these things connect
and think well, social media is bad news. But the
(09:29):
question is how what role does the government have Because
some people will say, well, look, if parents don't want
their kids to have social media, then they just have
to tell them they're not going to have it. But
I think that that's way. It's just not that easy
as a parent. If your kids friends have got X, Y,
and z social media apps and yours are not on it,
(09:53):
they are socially isolated and it is a I can
just speak from experience that it is very difficult to
say no in a really hard lined sense, short of
saying well you're not going to have a f and
just deal with it, which some parents managed to do.
Speaker 3 (10:09):
Yeah, I think that you alluded before to things like
alcohol bands for young people. And I think we can
think back to when DVDs and things had an age
restriction on them and things. Do you know what those
sorts of things were useful in that they supported parents,
but they only worked when parents were actually enforcing it.
(10:31):
If parents aren't on side with the laws around underage drinking,
for instance, kids are going to be drinking if just
the same as when DVDs were still a thing. You know,
in the DVD shop, I remember being in there and
the shopkeeper wasn't tanding over a DVD or a game
because of the age restriction. They went out and the
parent came huffing into a shop and bought it for them,
(10:52):
hired it for them. So you know, if parents aren't
on side, none of us is going to work. At
least a law like this does give a little bit
of support to parents who are trying to put the
handbrakes on.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
If you want to go more extra. There are people
who would argue, in fact, we just had it a
new Plymouth, New Plymouth. No sorry, I always muddle them
up because it's in Palmerston North the other N and
P get that confusion exactly coming into land in New Plymouth.
We're not expecting you. Sorry, Farvest North dead around. But
(11:27):
they've just had a vote and we're not going to
get into the politics of this so much. But they
had a vote about sugar and whether the council controlled
venues should whether the councilor should vote not to sell
sugary products. And I think basically it was conceded that
you know what, if you're going to a council event
or some sort of event in Palmeston North, you're going
(11:50):
there for retreat. If you want to have a sugary drink,
that's up to the parents, and so that's fine. But
there would be those who would advocate that there should
be a sugar tax because it supports maybe it encourages
parents and reminds parents this stuff's bad for you. And
so it is an interesting There is a gray area
as to where the government does have a role to
(12:11):
play with raising our kids.
Speaker 3 (12:13):
I think that it has its place. It's making law
about family life is always clunky and clumsy and often
doesn't have the effect it wants they want it to.
But I think first of all, you can appreciate the
fact that this is coming from a good place and will
help parents in some respects.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
But it.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
And what I particularly like about it is it's not
saying to kids, you're not allowed to do this. It's
saying social media companies, you are required to do checking
and you're required to verify their age and will and
so that I think is the right approach. There are
so these companies like snapchats making one point six billion
(13:01):
dollars out of mainly young people, and so go after them.
Now some people say, oh, you can't because they're international companies.
They're bigger than New Zealand, and that's where countries need
to join together. I really like the idea that Jacindra
Drn was able to swing a whole collection of countries
(13:21):
together around certain restrictions on social media.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
After the you're trying to trigger some of our listeners
one yeah, I mentioned.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
But you've got to remember that she managed to manage
to get a consensus of governments behind her constraint on
social media, and so it needs to be done internationally
and New Zealand it's like, that's one of the things
I do like about this. We're following Australia and so
when two countries get together, that has more cloud with
the companies, the social media companies, these multi billion dollar
(13:56):
companies that don't like to pay tax anywhere and dis
like to ignore laws. Well, the more countries that come
on board on something like the more chance you have
of responsibility from them.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
So let's look at some of the texts here, Tim,
If you have a problem in forcing your rules with
your children, not my problem. We don't need a national
band because some parents are weak or lazy. Now that's
a pretty full on text. I think it a little bit.
I think is devoid of any empathy for parenthood, that
it's not actually that easy to say no to your
kids on something as amorphous and pervasive and everywhere as
(14:28):
social media. But I mean, what do you make of
that argument, though, we don't need a national band.
Speaker 3 (14:33):
Because parents a week and lazy? Do you buy that
some parents are? Maybe they need more help and encouragement.
That's another thing about law like this, When say laws
around smoking, they haven't changed much in many, many years.
As regards age restrictions. Yeah, you know, I could you
know sixteen eighteen year olds couldn't go and buy cigarettes. Yeah,
(14:54):
twenty years ago. What has changed? Why has smoking plummeted
amongst young people, which.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
It has, which is great.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
It's because of education.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
Well it's bloody expensive too, and get va there's sorry, yeah,
just undermine my old argument. That's okay, no, but I'm
meaning there needs to be more than this. There needs
to be good education.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
We need not just to say you can't do it
when it's like alcohol use it's how it's it's we
need to give them some guidelines, some guidance, some mentoring,
some demonstrating how to do it as an adult.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
And an argument thing is, there's something that slightly irritates
me about, not just the judgmental appearance that somehow if
your kids are doing it because judge, yes, that might
be right. But if you want to take that attitude,
then just let's not have any censorship of movies and
(15:50):
television because that's up to the parents to patrol that
sort of thing. If you don't, if you think parents
are weak and lazy, let's let ten year olds buy alcohol.
It's up to the parents to intervene in that sort
of stuff. There's all sorts of rules that if you
follow that art's up to the parents. We would have
an incredibly of society. And I would argue that we
would be worse off.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
I think you'd be right, But there is an argument
for that, and that a lot of these things don't
work without parents being on site anyway. It's the government
can only do so much. And if parents aren't on
board with some of the logic behind age restrictions on alcohol, smoking,
any of these things that younger minds can't handle as well.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Maybe there is a point on that because I have
our kids look for the benefit of that text that
my kids don't have social media. They've got WhatsApp and
they message each other and they have a few laughs,
and I see them engage, and I think that that's fine.
I mean, I see my kids engaging with their cousins
over in the UK and it's and they're not hanging
their self esteem to it. It's just a communication method
(16:53):
in the same way that pick out the phone.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
I remember psychologist Stephen Biddoff, who I've got a lot
of time for saying that five out of six young
people are doing fine, five out of six, and saying
and for many of them thirteen and older, social media
is a boon. But it's not a boon for that
one out of five. It's a terrible pressure and something
(17:15):
which is awful, and it's also a terrible pressure on
kids that are less than say than thirteen. They don't
have the maturity to handle it. So that's something to
factor in the majority of teenagers, perhaps all teenagers are
using the stuff. Most are doing fine, it's all it's
going to be influenced them, of course, and shaping their
ideas and that jews, But most of them. If you
know teenagers, you know that most of them are great
(17:37):
kids and they're doing okay with this. But we've got
to think about that one in sex kids who is
you know, struggling with their mental health and the pressure
and getting bullied and hassled. And we've got to think
about those twelve eleven, ten year olds that are sneaking
in and using it and don't have the emotional maturity
to handle the early and burly of social media.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So laws have got.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
A factor in that as well. You know, laws sometimes
very very coarse, and you know, the net has to
be sorry too fine. Sometimes it has to snag some
of the good kids as well as the ones that
are what we're wanting to protect.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
So we'd love your calls on this. Is there a
role for the government to play on an issue like
social media. So look, as we know, yes, parents ultimately
should be the ones to oversee what their kids are doing.
But the law does have a part to play in
many areas of our lives where look, if kids want it.
For instance, if kids want to get their hands on cigarettes,
(18:37):
they'll still get their hands on cigarettes. But we have
laws around selling to kids, and you can't kids who
want to get hold of them. Sure, but the general
vibers that kids don't smoke these days, okay, with the
vapors are to furnish altogether, But does the law does
the government have a role to play in helping kids
(18:58):
parents make better choices? And the question is around social media,
So do you support I've got some great texts on this,
but we love you call eight hundred and eighteen eighty
text nine to it's a twenty five past fight in
the new Constitution cons just yesterday, monies, welcome back to
(19:32):
the Parents Squad. This is the we can collect of
my guest as John County is a parenting expert. Uh,
and we're talking about social media. But also where does
the government have a role in helping parents and communities
look after their kids? There's the way I put it,
so when I mean, we've got the bill by national
(19:53):
which may or may not get drawn. But are they
right to have a bill drawn up where social media
companies will have to prove that the child is sixteen
before they let them keep or get get a social
media account. What do you reckon? Because the argument somebody says, oh, well,
you know it's I'll repeat it again. It said, if
you have a problem with enforcing rules with your children,
(20:15):
it's not my problem. We don't need a national band
because some parents are weak and lazy. But I would
say that if you want to follow that logic all
the way down the line, you wouldn't ban smoking, you
wouldn't ban pornography, you wouldn't ban anything. You'd just say, hey, parents,
it's all up to you. Good luck. But no, we
do look for governments to help with that. This text
here says there will always be bad, lazy, neglectful parents.
(20:38):
Legislation isn't very likely to fix that. The decent parents
are already doing their best. Decent parents will use this
bill as a support to lean on lazy and neglectful parents.
They'll be indifferent. Nothing will change, and that I guess
I agree with that, John Cown I think so. Yeah,
that was fairly.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Sensible sort of getting towards this will A bill like
this won't fix things that will support parents who are
wanting to do the right thing.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
One says, I was out working full time at fifteen.
Surely someone paying tax can have social media and vote
even if you're a tax paying worker. No, well, I
don't know what to do with that. We just got it. Well,
look how complicated. If you've paid tax, you can vote.
Speaker 3 (21:19):
This is a very tricky thing about the maturity of teenagers.
I mean, there's twelve year olds that are more mature
than I am. And that's the thing. You know, there's
most of the teenagers I know are great kids, and
so setting an age limit is always going to be artificial,
and it's always going to catch out some that don't
(21:41):
need restricting. So where you draw the line is going
to be pretty arbitrary. There's no scientific way of just saying, well,
you know, a fifteen year old can't handle this with
a sixteen year old can. That's just ridiculous. But they
do have to draw. If they've got to draw a line,
you know, where do you draw it?
Speaker 2 (21:59):
Okay? One says there's a few texts on this, basically
saying the research is pretty well done here, there's plenty
ofdence of social harm. Ban it till sixteen. They will
find a way to communicate with each other. And I
guess that's the thing you're not saying kids can't communicate.
I mean, that's the whole thing about smartphones and if
(22:19):
we did go without the phone for a while, but
it's a very difficult one when every other peer of
your child has has got a smartphone or a phone.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
There is a way I think of getting on top
of this that implies that governments can in some way
control these big organizations the Twitter and Facebook and whoever
owns TikTok and snapchat. And that is these companies know
who are using their product. That's why they are so
appealing to advertisers. Advertisers can target their adverts straight to
(22:52):
someone because that social media platform knows exactly who's using it,
and so you if they are profiting from something which
is harmful and or illegal, then I think their income
should be confiscated. And I think if advertisers knew that
they're that their product was going to be you know, jeopardized,
(23:16):
if these companies knew that, hey, our income stream is
going to be jeopardized if we break this law, they
can tell that it's a fourteen year old using it,
you know, because they are experts at knowing who's using
their products. Even if those kids lied when they were
signing up, they can tell from everything else that they're
doing online who it is, and so you know, these
companies can be held accountable. I wonder how because it
(23:40):
hasn't has been passed in Australia, hasn't it I think
it has.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Yeah, And we don't really know how it's playing out
yet because in tax while for these things to.
Speaker 3 (23:48):
This, this is one of the things when people talk
about harm from social media, if we're talking about long
term harm, these things haven't been in the system long
enough to be able to you know. It's like when
television came out and people talked about the harm that
TV would do to kids. It took decades before there
was any sort of real evidence to show that of
all these kids grew up with tvvs. Ones didn't grow
(24:09):
up with TV. Look at the difference. And we're still
we're still analyzing what the downstream effects of soaking in
social media is I know what the effect is on
my brain. It shrinks it. I had the flu a
while back, and I say it in bed getting endless
TikTok therapy, and I just felt my brain shrinking and shriveling.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
But TikTok, what's that? I don't think I've even got
TikTok on my phone.
Speaker 3 (24:32):
Oh well, look at the you know, Facebook reels. That's
a similar thing, watching endlessly endless, funny little videos, and
it's adeos.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
I tend to I do tend to click on things
where people have silly accidents when they're trying to ride their.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Bicketle Oh, there's a shardenfreuder in watching people slip and
fall and drop things and look endlessly entertaining. And this
is why these things make billions and billions, is because
they know how to tickle people the way they want
to be tickled, and so you've got to go after
their money.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Here's one that says it's again we're probably talking circles
on this with someone says it's a moot point. It's unenforceable.
It'll be like visiting a website for an alcohol company.
You click on a button that you're eighteen, yes or no,
all the kids will click yes or use their parents
computer if their parents a weak world. Now, now, just
because there is a law, it won't make them no. Well,
(25:24):
the sentence doesn't finish on this text. But here's the thing.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
I've got to be very clever to be able to
make this enforcible, and I don't know how they're going
to check it. Some people have said about scanning IDs
and things like this, But the thing is, where are
lots of online things where the idea of the person
is verified. You know, you pay your taxes online, you
pay your bills online, you use your credit card online
(25:48):
because they can guarantee who it is. So yes, it
is possible. You know. Smart kids might still be able
to get past it, but they can make it a
lot better than just say declaring how old you are.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
The fact that some people will get around it doesn't
concern me. I think that the value in it is
helping parents signal to their kids that it's not okay
because it's also against the law. For instance, I mean,
of course we all break the rules. What I mean
you must do? What laws did you break when you're
a teenager? I mean, for instance, yeah, we all when
(26:21):
we got together for a party when I was at
school alcohol. When I was seventeen, I to remember going
to some maybe even sixteen, and there was we all
drank beer and alcohol. In fact, I look back there
and go, god, it was pretty loose, even though I
knew it was against the rules. But I knew it
was I think, there's it's different. If you're breaking the rules, fine,
(26:43):
But if it's permissive and it's not against the law,
I think the problems that we might have had in
small number might have been a lot larger, wouldn't they. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
The thing that I'm thinking as you're saying that, is
how current modern teenagers actually tend to behave better than that.
It's because as well as the law hasn't changed that
much around access to alcohol for miners, but the education
and the social pressure on each other has changed. And
so that's the stuff it's going to do it. There's
(27:14):
another factor in here too. I confess before that I
really enjoy watching those stupid little videos and things as
adults are doing it. Why should teenagers think that's harmful,
that's bad with mum and dad are doing it? What
some very interesting research show.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Bad drink bows?
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Well, that's again that's exactly the same argument. Really, it's
depending on how they see them drinking it. Research is
showing that the amount of screen time the kids do
is about the same as their parents. It might be
a different mix of screens, and that parents tend to
watch a bit more TV and use their PCs rather
than and laptops, whereas their kids using more phones, but
(27:53):
the amount of time spent staring at glass is the
same for kids and parents.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Now, no.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Parliament on earth can change behavior radically if kids are
seeing their major role models doing exactly actually the rules
to stop.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
I've had to explain that to my kids because, for instance,
when I'm reading the dad used to read that, you know,
dads used to read the newspaper. I read the news
on my phone, and my daughter has said to me, what, Dad,
you're on your phone, And I actually do say specifically,
I said no, I've been unapologetically. I say, look, this
is what I'm doing. You can come and check my
(28:31):
screen anytime and you'll see that I'm either reading the
news or reading email or whatever. Yeah. So John's suggested
something very mischievous and mouthing to me, You're a very
naughty man. John Cown I can't share with you. When
he's saying it's very naughty. Here's one that says, so,
(28:53):
what you're talking about now is having everyone having to
register to use the internet, because whether you be sixteen
or fifty or whatever, it means that everyone would have
to That is actually quite an issue, isn't it. So
John Cowen would have to prove that he was over sixteen,
but you just sent her a photo and they'd be like,
(29:16):
I still need more evidence. That's very kind of you.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
Yeah, but look, I don't know if anybody uses the
Internet without somehow verifying their identity. Do they have to
have an account?
Speaker 2 (29:28):
I can't remember how I first set up my I
think it's just having an email, and then you give
them the rest. You say, you know this is my name,
You tell them how old you are. Maybe maybe I
lied about my age. I'm not sure. By the way,
when it comes to avatars, does your avert what? I
recognize your avatar?
Speaker 3 (29:45):
Oh, you're talking about the little cartoony little cartoon. Well,
by avatar, I didn't actually mean that little cartoon. I
meant your online persona. Oh, where you could come across
as more attractive than you really are. You know where
I only mayly just use filtered images of yourself.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
And your achievements. Yeah, and all that sort of stuff.
I mean, your best version of you.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
I mean it's like your LinkedIn profile, it's your best image.
I always get LinkedIn and tender, confused, mischievous mode today.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
John Cawn, Tinder specialist, Ah, no, just kidding.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
And I'm getting to yeah, I know.
Speaker 2 (30:27):
Uh Winston apparently Winston Peter's New Zealand First doesn't support
the bill, but they believe the bill should be adopted
by the government. But he also supports a select Committee inquiry,
which I just have to be cynecon say, that's weird
that you would want to see all the evidence on this,
whereas that equal paything.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
You'd have to say that this government doesn't have a
great record of taking on board expert advice. They consult,
you know, the experts will put forward their advice and
then they disclare themselves to be the experts on just
about every topic.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
But yeah, right, we will continue to chat about this.
I'm with John Cown, He's a parenting expert, and we're
talking about whether the government has a role to play
in helping you tell your kids that guess what, No
Facebook for you because you're only fourteen, thirteen, twelve, whatever, Oh,
eight hundred and eighty ten eighty text nine to two
(31:23):
nine two. Got lots of texts. We'd love to take
some calls as well. It's nineteen minutes to see Yes,
welcome back. Lots of texts on this one. I do
love the odd good type. From time to time. We're
talking about whether the government does have a role to
play and restricting kids' access to social media. And I'd
love them to pass a law because some one of
those parents who might say no, but I also want
to be able to say, guess what. And you can't
either whether I say or not, because it's against the law.
(31:46):
This TYPEO on this one says high guts. I think
they mean, Hi, guys, great show, just busy making dinner.
But with our boys, we taught them treat others the
way you'd like to be treated. You can't go wrong.
We read to our children every night and had them
had them read to us on in later life, and
our boys now thirty three to nine, wonderful, caring and
(32:06):
intelligent human beings. It's simple, give them your time. I
think that's just a broad parenting thing rather than the
social media.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Honestly, that's so true. There's nothing new in social media.
If we're talking about bullying, we're talking about pressure to
conform and everything like that. It's just amplified. And so
those things that created good kids throughout.
Speaker 2 (32:29):
History.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
Spending time with your kids, building them up, teaching them
good values and morals, and best of all, living a
good life out in front of them, that's going to
help them. And even in this strange new world of
social media.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Actually, the question around ID is and interesting one, isn't it,
Because I'm trying to I've been, you know, around long
enough that I can't remember where I first actually proved
that I exist, you know, when you've given ID number,
what's your age or whatever. But the idea of whether
we would have to, you know, having people have to
have some sort of id's actually not necessarily the worst
(33:03):
thing the world. I think in the States, there's been
something that they're finally bringing in after about twenty years
since nine to eleven, about you can't fly without a
particular ide And I don't think the idea that I
don't think there's anything wrong with having to generate some
sort of identification method for people regardless of their ages.
What do you think.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I don't think the American example is particularly good because
that's I think he's just angling that so that to
prevent people from voting, because anyhow, that's by the bye.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (33:32):
I think that people need to be able to verify
who they are to do various things. New Zealand at
various times has tried to introduce the idea of ID
cards and things, and it's usually civil Libertarians have usually
objected to the idea, and they've often had an argument
that it's an intrusion into your personal life. And I
think if you're going to engage in a public world,
(33:54):
you need to be able to be responsible for who
you are, and part of that is fronting up with
admitting who you are. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
Another message says also we have to remember where New
Zealand Facebook doesn't care about us if we make it
impossible for Facebook to enforce and if kids cheat or
there's a bit of a grammar and this I can't
quite make the sense of this. No, I can't. Sorry,
I shouldn't have. I should have pre read that text
because it didn't quite make sense. No, So we'll move
(34:24):
on from that one how about no smartphones before sixteen?
Someone says, just a basic phone with no screen. Well, gosh,
you're talking about something that's really big, bloody impossible. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:35):
I mean, it's not impossible to install software on a
phone to turn a smartphone into a dumb phone if
they get a key to unlock all the other features.
But honestly, people love their phones, they love the gadgetary
and everything that's in it.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
And I think that.
Speaker 3 (34:55):
We're treating that these these often wonderful teenagers, like they're
on probation. In nature of fact, we just wanted to
protect them.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
You know, it may all be just a moot point, because,
as I say, it's the bill that's been drafted by National,
but it's not in the government ballot because the other
two months ago it's a private Members will have to
wait and see.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
Labor said they're open to supporting it. Act don't want
to because I don't know. I've probably got buddies that
are making money out of it.
Speaker 2 (35:21):
So cynical. Somebody texted about describing us as a couple
of lefties. I'm thinking you listen to me has charged that,
and as for me, I don't know. I'm not sure
that that most of my listeners would classify me as that.
But anyway, Hey, John, great to have you on the show.
Have you real life? A real life?
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Tomorrow night, I'm interviewing Lisa Parris who's spent twenty years
as a lawyer and now she's written a novel and
she's changed tack into being a writer and she's turned
churned out some great stuff. I've got her book at
home and I've been starting to read it and it's
pretty pretty gripping stuff.
Speaker 2 (35:59):
Is the theme about law or something?
Speaker 3 (36:01):
No, No, it's well and that life is about Laura.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
Say, we've all got one good book on us, don't they.
Speaker 3 (36:07):
Well, she's well, she's certainly living that out so far.
To let's see what the next one's like. But so
looking forward to talking to her tomorrow night. I'll find
out a bit more about it then when I'm chatting
on newstalk Z'B at seven thirty.
Speaker 2 (36:19):
Excellent. Great to see again, John. We'll be back in
just a moment to wrap sport with the Superman otherwise
known as Christopher Reeve will be with us eleven minutes
to six for.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
More from the Weekend Collective. Listen live to News talk
ZEDB weekends from three pm, or follow the podcast on
iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Weekend Collective podcast from News Talk SEDB,
Double Doubles, Dakers, clam Jasus Spades, Jasus Spades.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
No, I'm going to lose the US way I like it,
lady A, Welcome back to the Weekend Collective. This is
the Parent Squad. I'm Tim Beveridge. And by the way,
that is yes, that is Motorhead the Ace of Spades.
You know what, we just played that too because one
night and one of my talkback shows, I was talking
(00:48):
about I need to go out with some hard rock
and I put the text call out there. I said,
what what are some hard rock themes I could go
out with? And h this was one of them. And
I played it and I got so many text things.
I'm just loving it. I'm not sure it's the greatest
introduction to the Parent Squad, but actually it's music. Anyway. Anyway,
there we go. There's a little bit of motor Head.
I will happily take texts from anyone who wants to
(01:11):
recommend a good old classic, get your head banging rock
number to get into every hour, and I will take
a note of them all as I have from my
last time I requested it. Anyway, as I say that,
what's the name of the lead singer, is it? I
can't remember? Actually anyway, that's motor Head as to pay
Let's get into it. This is the parent squad and
(01:32):
look there is we want to talk about a recent
piece of news. I'll introduce my esteemed guest in just
a moment. We want to talk about a recent piece
of news which you will have caught up if you
follow the news at all, that the National Party, not
the government. Please note, the National Party have got a
bill that's gone into the biscuit tin. Such a quaint mechanism,
isn't it to propose? It's basically the proposing banning social
(01:57):
media for under sixteen year olds and it is following
essentially Australia's lead who have got a Lauren which is
doing exactly that. We don't know how it's going to
play out and everything, but that's the way Australia. Australia
is going. And I don't know what you think. Is
it a good idea for the government to actually have
a law around banning social media. It's worth reminding us
(02:22):
Alves as I say, people say, why is it just
not something that's going to be debated right now, and
it's because it's not a government bill, it's the National
Party bill. Because act don't support it. I don't know
if New Zealand first do, but should they. Here's my
quick take on it, and then I'll introduce my guest
because I like to keep everyone in the suspense a
little bit. As a parent, I would love them to
(02:47):
introduce a ban for social media. And some people say, well,
it's not enforceable, but there are lots of things in
life that aren't enforceable. Everyone breaks the rules, everyone breaks
social norms. It's not legal to drink, to buy alcohol
when you're not eighteen, people get away with it, kids
get access to alcohol. But the law is there, and
I think in this case the law actually supports parents
who probably love to ban social media. I'm not sure
(03:10):
I'm one hundred percent in favor of it, but that's
sitting on the fence. But broadly speaking, i'd love to
be able to be able to say to my kids, Okay,
you can't have social media. I don't care if your
friends have got it. Guess what, it's against the law.
But it's not ever as straightforward as we'd like it
to be. As it. But you might recall that there
was a time when the when there was a suggestion
(03:31):
that some schools would ban kids having access to cell phones.
And I did talk back on this and people like
it's so hard to enforce and all that sort of stuff.
All of a sudden, the government passed the law kids
don't have phones, and schools, of course they still access
and they lose and all that sort of thing. But
by and large it's been a big success. So I
want your calls on eight hundred and eighty ten to eighty,
and mischievously I've kept them waiting this long just because
(03:53):
I think it's nice to build up a little bit
of suspense because.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Always likely to take you because you're embarrassed about me.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Ladies and gentlemen, it's John Cahn, as my my I
don't know how to define you apart from parenting and
expert all round, good guy. Anyway, how are you?
Speaker 3 (04:08):
I'm well enough, and I wish I wish I was
as you described me, an expert, because I'm scratching my
head over this bill. I see sixty six percent of
parents are in favor of that.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
That's quite a lot.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
And I'm and so I am sixty six percent in
favor of it myself. But I can see a substantial.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Representative you are represented.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
I don't know what I represent, but I can see
all sorts of fish hooks and problems for a bill
like this. I can understand the motive because social media
it's well, first of all, let's just I reckon, it's
the biggest social change in our lifetime. It's like TV
being when TV was introduced, it was like the onset
(04:51):
of radio. It's where kids are living. And this is
the thing that a simple band won't change. It's where
their friends are. But the number one use of social
media that your kids put their phone is to connect
with their mates. And that's what they and that's why
the you know, Snapchat and TikTok and Instagram and YouTube
(05:14):
are the four biggest ones used by our teenagers and
two of them are primarily just to connect to their mates.
So this is the this is the big problem when
that's such a huge thing for our teenage.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
Well, of course their mates won't be able to have
it either, so it's not a question that we're going
to bound it for just the kids who don't have it.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
So on your logical mind, I admire that.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
I know, I do try and a little bit of
logic from time to time, because you usually it's just
rabbit emotion and opinion. But so, for instance, my kids,
and that I don't like to talk too specifically about
my kids. They don't have social media accounts because they
are actually I think too young for the guidelines of
when you can have our own account, and they've been
(05:56):
actually haven't been arguing so much for it because the
medium they used to connect with each other is WhatsApp,
and so they can have status updates where they change
that and it might say something about what they're doing
with their day, but generally they just message each other,
as opposed to the Instagram sort of life where you
are putting up photos of this and you're trying to
(06:17):
live your best life and you're waiting to see how
many people like see and in fact, this is the
other side of it. One do you support the government
stepping in when it comes to access to social media?
But what is it about social media that I think
is the dangerous bit? And dangerous bit Okay, language choice,
I could use other words, but to me, it's that
(06:38):
hanging your self esteem on how many people have engaged
with your post, how many people are liking it, and
the way you represent your life, and the addictive nature
of having to go back to have I got any
more likes? Have I got any more? You know?
Speaker 3 (06:50):
By the ways, it's a good time for you to
do a plug for your Facebook page.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Actually, funny thing is Facebook for me. I don't know
where it's gone. But the other thing I just mentioned
by in support of this or just as part of
the discussion, is I I had a guest on my
show a couple of weeks ago who was involved in
Silicon Valley, back at the time when Zuckerberg and all
those guys were starting to make their money. And he's
been to Mark zuck Atberger's house and there are no
(07:16):
devices allowed in his house at all, partly probably because
he doesn't want I don't know whether there's some sort
of piracy thing, but it was mainly because he doesn't
allow his kids to access social media.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
And yeah, that's the same man who has in recent
days removed even fact checking from Facebook.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
Now.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
By the way, Facebook is probably not a huge part
of this discussion because it's only used such a boomer discussion.
It's one in eight teenagers still use it, but it's
certainly not in the front ranking of the things that
teenagers use.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
See.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
This is part of also the problem when we're thinking
about social media, what are we actually meaning? Are we
talking about those ones that they use just to keep
on talking to their friends, like Snapchat, which is you know,
by and large, it seems to be relatively safe. I
know there was a big fluffle about it when it
first came out, but it seems to be something that
(08:12):
allows for I think they use the term ephemeral communication.
They communicate it's gone. It's not as if it's lingering
around to cash them out, or is it like Instagram,
like you say, which actually defines their life. The TikTok
is the biggest growing one, and they are just endlessly
doing tiktoks of themselves and putting filters on to make
(08:34):
themselves look better. In fact, most teenagers prefer their online
image to their actual image. Their avatar. Their self online
is who they see themselves as rather than the teenager
they look at in the mirror, so it's shaped who
they are, and this is where it starts to be pernicious.
I think when it's been when you're being shaped from
(08:56):
the outside and you're shaping yourself in such an unreal way.
So yeah, I really do think there needs to be
some brakespit on it. I just wonder whether this's currently
just is going to do much.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
The broader question is actually around what role governments should
play in helping us raise our kids. So this is
a big issue mental health and social media. And I
don't think there be many people who wouldn't hear you know,
teenagers mentally our social media, how do these things connect
and think well, social media is bad news. But the
(09:29):
question is how what role does the government have Because
some people will say, well, look, if parents don't want
their kids to have social media, then they just have
to tell them they're not going to have it. But
I think that that's way. It's just not that easy
as a parent. If your kids friends have got X, Y,
and z social media apps and yours are not on it,
(09:53):
they are socially isolated and it is a I can
just speak from experience that it is very difficult to
say no in a really hard lined sense, short of
saying well you're not going to have a f and
just deal with it, which some parents managed to do.
Speaker 3 (10:09):
Yeah, I think that you alluded before to things like
alcohol bands for young people. And I think we can
think back to when DVDs and things had an age
restriction on them and things. Do you know what those
sorts of things were useful in that they supported parents,
but they only worked when parents were actually enforcing it.
(10:31):
If parents aren't on side with the laws around underage drinking,
for instance, kids are going to be drinking if just
the same as when DVDs were still a thing. You know,
in the DVD shop, I remember being in there and
the shopkeeper wasn't tanding over a DVD or a game
because of the age restriction. They went out and the
parent came huffing into a shop and bought it for them,
(10:52):
hired it for them. So you know, if parents aren't
on side, none of us is going to work. At
least a law like this does give a little bit
of support to parents who are trying to put the
handbrakes on.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
If you want to go more extra. There are people
who would argue, in fact, we just had it a
new Plymouth, New Plymouth. No sorry, I always muddle them
up because it's in Palmerston North the other N and
P get that confusion exactly coming into land in New Plymouth.
We're not expecting you. Sorry, Farvest North dead around. But
(11:27):
they've just had a vote and we're not going to
get into the politics of this so much. But they
had a vote about sugar and whether the council controlled
venues should whether the councilor should vote not to sell
sugary products. And I think basically it was conceded that
you know what, if you're going to a council event
or some sort of event in Palmeston North, you're going
(11:50):
there for retreat. If you want to have a sugary drink,
that's up to the parents, and so that's fine. But
there would be those who would advocate that there should
be a sugar tax because it supports maybe it encourages
parents and reminds parents this stuff's bad for you. And
so it is an interesting There is a gray area
as to where the government does have a role to
(12:11):
play with raising our kids.
Speaker 3 (12:13):
I think that it has its place. It's making law
about family life is always clunky and clumsy and often
doesn't have the effect it wants they want it to.
But I think first of all, you can appreciate the
fact that this is coming from a good place and will
help parents in some respects.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
But it.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
And what I particularly like about it is it's not
saying to kids, you're not allowed to do this. It's
saying social media companies, you are required to do checking
and you're required to verify their age and will and
so that I think is the right approach. There are
so these companies like snapchats making one point six billion
(13:01):
dollars out of mainly young people, and so go after them.
Now some people say, oh, you can't because they're international companies.
They're bigger than New Zealand, and that's where countries need
to join together. I really like the idea that Jacindra
Drn was able to swing a whole collection of countries
(13:21):
together around certain restrictions on social media.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
After the you're trying to trigger some of our listeners
one yeah, I mentioned.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
But you've got to remember that she managed to manage
to get a consensus of governments behind her constraint on
social media, and so it needs to be done internationally
and New Zealand it's like, that's one of the things
I do like about this. We're following Australia and so
when two countries get together, that has more cloud with
the companies, the social media companies, these multi billion dollar
(13:56):
companies that don't like to pay tax anywhere and dis
like to ignore laws. Well, the more countries that come
on board on something like the more chance you have
of responsibility from them.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
So let's look at some of the texts here, Tim,
If you have a problem in forcing your rules with
your children, not my problem. We don't need a national
band because some parents are weak or lazy. Now that's
a pretty full on text. I think it a little bit.
I think is devoid of any empathy for parenthood, that
it's not actually that easy to say no to your
kids on something as amorphous and pervasive and everywhere as
(14:28):
social media. But I mean, what do you make of
that argument, though, we don't need a national band.
Speaker 3 (14:33):
Because parents a week and lazy? Do you buy that
some parents are? Maybe they need more help and encouragement.
That's another thing about law like this, When say laws
around smoking, they haven't changed much in many, many years.
As regards age restrictions. Yeah, you know, I could you
know sixteen eighteen year olds couldn't go and buy cigarettes. Yeah,
(14:54):
twenty years ago. What has changed? Why has smoking plummeted
amongst young people, which.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
It has, which is great.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
It's because of education.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
Well it's bloody expensive too, and get va there's sorry, yeah,
just undermine my old argument. That's okay, no, but I'm
meaning there needs to be more than this. There needs
to be good education.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
We need not just to say you can't do it
when it's like alcohol use it's how it's it's we
need to give them some guidelines, some guidance, some mentoring,
some demonstrating how to do it as an adult.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
And an argument thing is, there's something that slightly irritates
me about, not just the judgmental appearance that somehow if
your kids are doing it because judge, yes, that might
be right. But if you want to take that attitude,
then just let's not have any censorship of movies and
(15:50):
television because that's up to the parents to patrol that
sort of thing. If you don't, if you think parents
are weak and lazy, let's let ten year olds buy alcohol.
It's up to the parents to intervene in that sort
of stuff. There's all sorts of rules that if you
follow that art's up to the parents. We would have
an incredibly of society. And I would argue that we
would be worse off.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
I think you'd be right, But there is an argument
for that, and that a lot of these things don't
work without parents being on site anyway. It's the government
can only do so much. And if parents aren't on
board with some of the logic behind age restrictions on alcohol, smoking,
any of these things that younger minds can't handle as well.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Maybe there is a point on that because I have
our kids look for the benefit of that text that
my kids don't have social media. They've got WhatsApp and
they message each other and they have a few laughs,
and I see them engage, and I think that that's fine.
I mean, I see my kids engaging with their cousins
over in the UK and it's and they're not hanging
their self esteem to it. It's just a communication method
(16:53):
in the same way that pick out the phone.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
I remember psychologist Stephen Biddoff, who I've got a lot
of time for saying that five out of six young
people are doing fine, five out of six, and saying
and for many of them thirteen and older, social media
is a boon. But it's not a boon for that
one out of five. It's a terrible pressure and something
(17:15):
which is awful, and it's also a terrible pressure on
kids that are less than say than thirteen. They don't
have the maturity to handle it. So that's something to
factor in the majority of teenagers, perhaps all teenagers are
using the stuff. Most are doing fine, it's all it's
going to be influenced them, of course, and shaping their
ideas and that jews, But most of them. If you
know teenagers, you know that most of them are great
(17:37):
kids and they're doing okay with this. But we've got
to think about that one in sex kids who is
you know, struggling with their mental health and the pressure
and getting bullied and hassled. And we've got to think
about those twelve eleven, ten year olds that are sneaking
in and using it and don't have the emotional maturity
to handle the early and burly of social media.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So laws have got.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
A factor in that as well. You know, laws sometimes
very very coarse, and you know, the net has to
be sorry too fine. Sometimes it has to snag some
of the good kids as well as the ones that
are what we're wanting to protect.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
So we'd love your calls on this. Is there a
role for the government to play on an issue like
social media. So look, as we know, yes, parents ultimately
should be the ones to oversee what their kids are doing.
But the law does have a part to play in
many areas of our lives where look, if kids want it.
For instance, if kids want to get their hands on cigarettes,
(18:37):
they'll still get their hands on cigarettes. But we have
laws around selling to kids, and you can't kids who
want to get hold of them. Sure, but the general
vibers that kids don't smoke these days, okay, with the
vapors are to furnish altogether, But does the law does
the government have a role to play in helping kids
(18:58):
parents make better choices? And the question is around social media,
So do you support I've got some great texts on this,
but we love you call eight hundred and eighteen eighty
text nine to it's a twenty five past fight in
the new Constitution cons just yesterday, monies, welcome back to
(19:32):
the Parents Squad. This is the we can collect of
my guest as John County is a parenting expert. Uh,
and we're talking about social media. But also where does
the government have a role in helping parents and communities
look after their kids? There's the way I put it,
so when I mean, we've got the bill by national
(19:53):
which may or may not get drawn. But are they
right to have a bill drawn up where social media
companies will have to prove that the child is sixteen
before they let them keep or get get a social
media account. What do you reckon? Because the argument somebody says, oh, well,
you know it's I'll repeat it again. It said, if
you have a problem with enforcing rules with your children,
(20:15):
it's not my problem. We don't need a national band
because some parents are weak and lazy. But I would
say that if you want to follow that logic all
the way down the line, you wouldn't ban smoking, you
wouldn't ban pornography, you wouldn't ban anything. You'd just say, hey, parents,
it's all up to you. Good luck. But no, we
do look for governments to help with that. This text
here says there will always be bad, lazy, neglectful parents.
(20:38):
Legislation isn't very likely to fix that. The decent parents
are already doing their best. Decent parents will use this
bill as a support to lean on lazy and neglectful parents.
They'll be indifferent. Nothing will change, and that I guess
I agree with that, John Cown I think so. Yeah,
that was fairly.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Sensible sort of getting towards this will A bill like
this won't fix things that will support parents who are
wanting to do the right thing.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
One says, I was out working full time at fifteen.
Surely someone paying tax can have social media and vote
even if you're a tax paying worker. No, well, I
don't know what to do with that. We just got it. Well,
look how complicated. If you've paid tax, you can vote.
Speaker 3 (21:19):
This is a very tricky thing about the maturity of teenagers.
I mean, there's twelve year olds that are more mature
than I am. And that's the thing. You know, there's
most of the teenagers I know are great kids, and
so setting an age limit is always going to be artificial,
and it's always going to catch out some that don't
(21:41):
need restricting. So where you draw the line is going
to be pretty arbitrary. There's no scientific way of just saying, well,
you know, a fifteen year old can't handle this with
a sixteen year old can. That's just ridiculous. But they
do have to draw. If they've got to draw a line,
you know, where do you draw it?
Speaker 2 (21:59):
Okay? One says there's a few texts on this, basically
saying the research is pretty well done here, there's plenty
ofdence of social harm. Ban it till sixteen. They will
find a way to communicate with each other. And I
guess that's the thing you're not saying kids can't communicate.
I mean, that's the whole thing about smartphones and if
(22:19):
we did go without the phone for a while, but
it's a very difficult one when every other peer of
your child has has got a smartphone or a phone.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
There is a way I think of getting on top
of this that implies that governments can in some way
control these big organizations the Twitter and Facebook and whoever
owns TikTok and snapchat. And that is these companies know
who are using their product. That's why they are so
appealing to advertisers. Advertisers can target their adverts straight to
(22:52):
someone because that social media platform knows exactly who's using it,
and so you if they are profiting from something which
is harmful and or illegal, then I think their income
should be confiscated. And I think if advertisers knew that
they're that their product was going to be you know, jeopardized,
(23:16):
if these companies knew that, hey, our income stream is
going to be jeopardized if we break this law, they
can tell that it's a fourteen year old using it,
you know, because they are experts at knowing who's using
their products. Even if those kids lied when they were
signing up, they can tell from everything else that they're
doing online who it is, and so you know, these
companies can be held accountable. I wonder how because it
(23:40):
hasn't has been passed in Australia, hasn't it I think
it has.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Yeah, And we don't really know how it's playing out
yet because in tax while for these things to.
Speaker 3 (23:48):
This, this is one of the things when people talk
about harm from social media, if we're talking about long
term harm, these things haven't been in the system long
enough to be able to you know. It's like when
television came out and people talked about the harm that
TV would do to kids. It took decades before there
was any sort of real evidence to show that of
all these kids grew up with tvvs. Ones didn't grow
(24:09):
up with TV. Look at the difference. And we're still
we're still analyzing what the downstream effects of soaking in
social media is I know what the effect is on
my brain. It shrinks it. I had the flu a
while back, and I say it in bed getting endless
TikTok therapy, and I just felt my brain shrinking and shriveling.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
But TikTok, what's that? I don't think I've even got
TikTok on my phone.
Speaker 3 (24:32):
Oh well, look at the you know, Facebook reels. That's
a similar thing, watching endlessly endless, funny little videos, and
it's adeos.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
I tend to I do tend to click on things
where people have silly accidents when they're trying to ride their.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Bicketle Oh, there's a shardenfreuder in watching people slip and
fall and drop things and look endlessly entertaining. And this
is why these things make billions and billions, is because
they know how to tickle people the way they want
to be tickled, and so you've got to go after
their money.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Here's one that says it's again we're probably talking circles
on this with someone says it's a moot point. It's unenforceable.
It'll be like visiting a website for an alcohol company.
You click on a button that you're eighteen, yes or no,
all the kids will click yes or use their parents
computer if their parents a weak world. Now, now, just
because there is a law, it won't make them no. Well,
(25:24):
the sentence doesn't finish on this text. But here's the thing.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
I've got to be very clever to be able to
make this enforcible, and I don't know how they're going
to check it. Some people have said about scanning IDs
and things like this, But the thing is, where are
lots of online things where the idea of the person
is verified. You know, you pay your taxes online, you
pay your bills online, you use your credit card online
(25:48):
because they can guarantee who it is. So yes, it
is possible. You know. Smart kids might still be able
to get past it, but they can make it a
lot better than just say declaring how old you are.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
The fact that some people will get around it doesn't
concern me. I think that the value in it is
helping parents signal to their kids that it's not okay
because it's also against the law. For instance, I mean,
of course we all break the rules. What I mean
you must do? What laws did you break when you're
a teenager? I mean, for instance, yeah, we all when
(26:21):
we got together for a party when I was at
school alcohol. When I was seventeen, I to remember going
to some maybe even sixteen, and there was we all
drank beer and alcohol. In fact, I look back there
and go, god, it was pretty loose, even though I
knew it was against the rules. But I knew it
was I think, there's it's different. If you're breaking the rules, fine,
(26:43):
But if it's permissive and it's not against the law,
I think the problems that we might have had in
small number might have been a lot larger, wouldn't they. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
The thing that I'm thinking as you're saying that, is
how current modern teenagers actually tend to behave better than that.
It's because as well as the law hasn't changed that
much around access to alcohol for miners, but the education
and the social pressure on each other has changed. And
so that's the stuff it's going to do it. There's
(27:14):
another factor in here too. I confess before that I
really enjoy watching those stupid little videos and things as
adults are doing it. Why should teenagers think that's harmful,
that's bad with mum and dad are doing it? What
some very interesting research show.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Bad drink bows?
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Well, that's again that's exactly the same argument. Really, it's
depending on how they see them drinking it. Research is
showing that the amount of screen time the kids do
is about the same as their parents. It might be
a different mix of screens, and that parents tend to
watch a bit more TV and use their PCs rather
than and laptops, whereas their kids using more phones, but
(27:53):
the amount of time spent staring at glass is the
same for kids and parents.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Now, no.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Parliament on earth can change behavior radically if kids are
seeing their major role models doing exactly actually the rules
to stop.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
I've had to explain that to my kids because, for instance,
when I'm reading the dad used to read that, you know,
dads used to read the newspaper. I read the news
on my phone, and my daughter has said to me, what, Dad,
you're on your phone, And I actually do say specifically,
I said no, I've been unapologetically. I say, look, this
is what I'm doing. You can come and check my
(28:31):
screen anytime and you'll see that I'm either reading the
news or reading email or whatever. Yeah. So John's suggested
something very mischievous and mouthing to me, You're a very
naughty man. John Cown I can't share with you. When
he's saying it's very naughty. Here's one that says, so,
(28:53):
what you're talking about now is having everyone having to
register to use the internet, because whether you be sixteen
or fifty or whatever, it means that everyone would have
to That is actually quite an issue, isn't it. So
John Cowen would have to prove that he was over sixteen,
but you just sent her a photo and they'd be like,
(29:16):
I still need more evidence. That's very kind of you.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
Yeah, but look, I don't know if anybody uses the
Internet without somehow verifying their identity. Do they have to
have an account?
Speaker 2 (29:28):
I can't remember how I first set up my I
think it's just having an email, and then you give
them the rest. You say, you know this is my name,
You tell them how old you are. Maybe maybe I
lied about my age. I'm not sure. By the way,
when it comes to avatars, does your avert what? I
recognize your avatar?
Speaker 3 (29:45):
Oh, you're talking about the little cartoony little cartoon. Well,
by avatar, I didn't actually mean that little cartoon. I
meant your online persona. Oh, where you could come across
as more attractive than you really are. You know where
I only mayly just use filtered images of yourself.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
And your achievements. Yeah, and all that sort of stuff.
I mean, your best version of you.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
I mean it's like your LinkedIn profile, it's your best image.
I always get LinkedIn and tender, confused, mischievous mode today.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
John Cawn, Tinder specialist, Ah, no, just kidding.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
And I'm getting to yeah, I know.
Speaker 2 (30:27):
Uh Winston apparently Winston Peter's New Zealand First doesn't support
the bill, but they believe the bill should be adopted
by the government. But he also supports a select Committee inquiry,
which I just have to be cynecon say, that's weird
that you would want to see all the evidence on this,
whereas that equal paything.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
You'd have to say that this government doesn't have a
great record of taking on board expert advice. They consult,
you know, the experts will put forward their advice and
then they disclare themselves to be the experts on just
about every topic.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
But yeah, right, we will continue to chat about this.
I'm with John Cown, He's a parenting expert, and we're
talking about whether the government has a role to play
in helping you tell your kids that guess what, No
Facebook for you because you're only fourteen, thirteen, twelve, whatever, Oh,
eight hundred and eighty ten eighty text nine to two
(31:23):
nine two. Got lots of texts. We'd love to take
some calls as well. It's nineteen minutes to see Yes,
welcome back. Lots of texts on this one. I do
love the odd good type. From time to time. We're
talking about whether the government does have a role to
play and restricting kids' access to social media. And I'd
love them to pass a law because some one of
those parents who might say no, but I also want
to be able to say, guess what. And you can't
either whether I say or not, because it's against the law.
(31:46):
This TYPEO on this one says high guts. I think
they mean, Hi, guys, great show, just busy making dinner.
But with our boys, we taught them treat others the
way you'd like to be treated. You can't go wrong.
We read to our children every night and had them
had them read to us on in later life, and
our boys now thirty three to nine, wonderful, caring and
(32:06):
intelligent human beings. It's simple, give them your time. I
think that's just a broad parenting thing rather than the
social media.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Honestly, that's so true. There's nothing new in social media.
If we're talking about bullying, we're talking about pressure to
conform and everything like that. It's just amplified. And so
those things that created good kids throughout.
Speaker 2 (32:29):
History.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
Spending time with your kids, building them up, teaching them
good values and morals, and best of all, living a
good life out in front of them, that's going to
help them. And even in this strange new world of
social media.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Actually, the question around ID is and interesting one, isn't it,
Because I'm trying to I've been, you know, around long
enough that I can't remember where I first actually proved
that I exist, you know, when you've given ID number,
what's your age or whatever. But the idea of whether
we would have to, you know, having people have to
have some sort of id's actually not necessarily the worst
(33:03):
thing the world. I think in the States, there's been
something that they're finally bringing in after about twenty years
since nine to eleven, about you can't fly without a
particular ide And I don't think the idea that I
don't think there's anything wrong with having to generate some
sort of identification method for people regardless of their ages.
What do you think.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I don't think the American example is particularly good because
that's I think he's just angling that so that to
prevent people from voting, because anyhow, that's by the bye.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (33:32):
I think that people need to be able to verify
who they are to do various things. New Zealand at
various times has tried to introduce the idea of ID
cards and things, and it's usually civil Libertarians have usually
objected to the idea, and they've often had an argument
that it's an intrusion into your personal life. And I
think if you're going to engage in a public world,
(33:54):
you need to be able to be responsible for who
you are, and part of that is fronting up with
admitting who you are. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
Another message says also we have to remember where New
Zealand Facebook doesn't care about us if we make it
impossible for Facebook to enforce and if kids cheat or
there's a bit of a grammar and this I can't
quite make the sense of this. No, I can't. Sorry,
I shouldn't have. I should have pre read that text
because it didn't quite make sense. No, So we'll move
(34:24):
on from that one how about no smartphones before sixteen?
Someone says, just a basic phone with no screen. Well, gosh,
you're talking about something that's really big, bloody impossible. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:35):
I mean, it's not impossible to install software on a
phone to turn a smartphone into a dumb phone if
they get a key to unlock all the other features.
But honestly, people love their phones, they love the gadgetary
and everything that's in it.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
And I think that.
Speaker 3 (34:55):
We're treating that these these often wonderful teenagers, like they're
on probation. In nature of fact, we just wanted to
protect them.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
You know, it may all be just a moot point, because,
as I say, it's the bill that's been drafted by National,
but it's not in the government ballot because the other
two months ago it's a private Members will have to
wait and see.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
Labor said they're open to supporting it. Act don't want
to because I don't know. I've probably got buddies that
are making money out of it.
Speaker 2 (35:21):
So cynical. Somebody texted about describing us as a couple
of lefties. I'm thinking you listen to me has charged that,
and as for me, I don't know. I'm not sure
that that most of my listeners would classify me as that.
But anyway, Hey, John, great to have you on the show.
Have you real life? A real life?
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Tomorrow night, I'm interviewing Lisa Parris who's spent twenty years
as a lawyer and now she's written a novel and
she's changed tack into being a writer and she's turned
churned out some great stuff. I've got her book at
home and I've been starting to read it and it's
pretty pretty gripping stuff.
Speaker 2 (35:59):
Is the theme about law or something?
Speaker 3 (36:01):
No, No, it's well and that life is about Laura.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
Say, we've all got one good book on us, don't they.
Speaker 3 (36:07):
Well, she's well, she's certainly living that out so far.
To let's see what the next one's like. But so
looking forward to talking to her tomorrow night. I'll find
out a bit more about it then when I'm chatting
on newstalk Z'B at seven thirty.
Speaker 2 (36:19):
Excellent. Great to see again, John. We'll be back in
just a moment to wrap sport with the Superman otherwise
known as Christopher Reeve will be with us eleven minutes
to six for.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
More from the Weekend Collective. Listen live to News talk
ZEDB weekends from three pm, or follow the podcast on
iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.