Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 59:26 to 1:12:32
The eSafety Commissioner discusses the transition to bi-monthly compliance reporting and the evaluation of the proposed social media ban for minors. Senators question the decision to cease monthly updates and the timeline for potential legal action against platforms.
Topics: Online safety, Child safety
Speakers: Julie Inman Grant, Senator Sarah Henderson, Ms. Heidi Snell, Speaker 5, Speaker 1
Thank you very much. Uh we resume our safety our session with the e safety commissioner and I will hand over to
>> Thank you very much chair commissioner. I'm wondering if you could update the committee on the social media ban uh and any updated uh statistics that you have as to the success or otherwise of the measure. I've got some other questions to ask you
Well, um, as you will recall, um, there was an amen legislative amendment that provided us with, um, significant, uh, new powers and that went to inquiry. Uh, that reached Royal Ascent on a Friday afternoon. And the following Monday when we were a able to do so, we started issuing notices. So, we're really in the thick of um going back and forth with um you know about five companies and um all the lawyers on getting these notices and we're starting to get them in and collate them. So, I just say we're deep in the regulatory investigations uh process unless you'd like to add anything miss.
>> I was actually seeking um updated data on uh compliance with the social media
Uh so uh Senator, we've moved now to um to by month or two monthly reporting on numbers rather than monthly. Um we don't have the latest responses from the platforms because we've focused our notice powers really on getting information and documents under the new powers to progress the um investigations. That's because the numbers no longer really tell us the story of whether platforms are complying because those numbers now take into account a whole range of things in terms of that make it difficult to use them to assess compliance. So our inquiries now tend to focus more on um particularly in terms of documents what systems and processes and policies they have in place and their decision making around compliance. those go to the heart of the investigations.
>> So, Commissioner, are you saying that previously you've reported on the number under 16 teenagers uh still able to access a social media account? Are you saying that you're no longer reporting on that?
>> No. So um so we had a separate evaluation a longitudinal evaluation where we're um providing research and getting data from um about four 4,000 of diads. So parents and children we put the first evaluation at plusu [clears throat] um in in March I believe or was it May? we collected in May and uh that is where we found that there was a 20% decrease in holdings of under 16s uh having uh having having accounts um there were some other um interesting and notable trends as as you know we're trying to look at everything from are they sleeping better are they playing more sport um are they're being asked by the platforms to even age assure and 50% of children told us at that time they had not Um so we've just um we're doing these in three month increments. Of course um you know 3 months is early to see market changes. Um and so I believe we just um hit the six month mark and are collating the data from that and we'll we'll be able to provide something
Sorry, I'm I'm a bit confused here because you're doing three monthly reporting
>> on through our compliance independ No, this is will this is really about the evaluation of Yeah. What what kind of impacts >> is um the policy and the implementation having on a broad range of of factors from you know the
>> so shouldn't there be a report for the
I
>> when was the most rec Sorry. When was the most recent report?
>> Senator, there's a distinction between the compliance and enforcement reporting notices that Miss Snell referred to which happens now every second month. The commissioner is referring to our long-term evaluation where we released one report and we have another report coming out before the end of the year, but that's exploring the impact of the policy on the lives of Australians, not around the compliance numbers from
>> Okay. So, when is that report due?
the evaluation report or the compliance?
>> The compliance report.
>> The compliance. So, at this stage, we're not putting out another public compliance report like the March one because we are in in-depth investigations and we consider that those that reporting at this point may prejudice those investigations. Well,
well, I mean,
>> so the outcome of those investigations will be our next public reporting in terms of platforms compliance with
>> Well, the March compliance report showed that seven out of 10 children under the age of 16 were still on social media. That was your assessment. Uh why is that not important to continue to report on, Commissioner?
uh we're continuing using the tools that we have to be able to ask those questions. Um so we're we're taking multiple approaches that gives us a much broader range of of data. Of course, it's important, but anything that will undermine the integrity of of an investigation is something that we have
to deeply consider. Commissioner, how is informing Australians about the success or otherwise of the social media ban undermining integrity? I mean, surely part of your job is to be transparent in
Malaysia. >> Absolutely. And and we've been more trans. We didn't need to do this evaluation to try and look at things such as the, you know, impact on schooling and sleep and even unintended consequences. I mean, the other thing that we can we can tell you that um you know, we're continuing to track is the idea of um you know, there's a lot of speculation that um young people would be migrating to darker areas of the internet. We haven't seen any evidence of that. And in fact, it shows you um how entrenched the power of these mainstream social media companies have been in that um when children um ostensibly underage children uh started going to places like Big O Live or Lemonade or Cap Cut, they may have um downloaded. We might have seen temporary spikes, but they never really used the platforms because there wasn't a critical mass of their peers there. So, um, where we're we're seeing kids are com, you know, reconvening where their friends are and that's mostly on messaging sites and, um, on group text.
>> Can I also just
>> when was the decision? So, I'm just looking, sorry, um, the social media minimum age compliance update uh, of March 2026. When was the decision made not to do any more compliance updates?
When we moved into more formal investigations following the issuing of that compliance update, then the decision was made to focus on the detailed investigations and preserve um the integrity of those investigations to ensure that we are best placed to take enforcement action against companies for non-compliance once we've finished our evidence gathering. I mean,
isn't it also important that Australians know the success or otherwise of this law?
>> Apologies. Could I just clarify? The seven out of 10 statistic you mentioned actually came from a research survey, not from the compliance notices. So, we are continuing to capture that data through research and evaluation methods. The the elements that Miss Nell is referring to is around the investigation. So,
>> no, I know I know the difference. Yes. >> And I know it was from a research survey, the one in March as well. You haven't rung every child under the age of 16,
>> but we did not get that information from notices from platforms. Just to clarify,
>> I understand it. I'm talking about the compliance update and I'm just raising concerns >> that there has been a decision made not to continue >> to do those reports.
>> well we do have a small number of staff and we can the same staff is doing all the assessment of the notices, writing the notices um helping us build the evidence for the case um and um and then we have a research team that's doing the um evaluation separately. But these are all mixed methods. So um at at some point we also have to prioritize where we need to focus our efforts. And I think what Miss Snell was saying is our priority given that we know compliance is not what it should be is gathering the [snorts] evidence that we can take to to court um that they're not taking reasonable steps to um keep under 16s from having and holding accounts. So this is this is what you have to do as a small regulator. you have to um balance the the the March report we thought was very important but it was a huge and heavy
Commissioner, can you update me on your investigation? Because Minister Wells did an interview where she was a asked if you were suing Facebook, Tik Tok, and other platforms, and she indicated yes, but then added a condition to her answer. So, could you please provide an update as to where you're at? Are you suing these platforms? Will will you be commencing
proceedings? um if we have the evidence to make a case. Um again because we have about a six-month lag because of the um the inquiry that um went about in terms of getting those new powers getting those new powers
>> too commissioner wasn't a sixmon lag. >> it was it. Sorry. Sorry, Minister. If I could just So the the proposal was middle of middle middle of the year. There was about a twomon [clears throat] >> two month.
>> I'm talking about from the beginning and when the the um when we first realized um you where where we were and the tools that we didn't have and raised it with the government, that whole process took about 6 months. So the moment we got the powers, we started using them. Um, you know, we're asking them extensive questions. We're actually dealing with relatively new um age assurance providers who haven't dealt with lawyers who haven't been part of document processes. So we're doing lots of back and forth. So we're gathering all of the evidence that we can. Um, obviously we are looking at the potential outcome of the the high court. We're going to high cart challenge. We're going to see how that plays out in November. That could have ultimately have bearing on on costs um depending on the outcomes. So, we're looking at a number of factors, but back to uh what Miss Snell said to you, we are deep in the throws of trying to build the evidence to put some key cases together. And there may be some cases, um obviously the litigation in the US was significant. um uh they are asking for different different things or it goes further in some respects um from just having and holding accounts but we are having conversations with the platforms. I mean we I think in any geography we would expect that um if they are taking some safety interventions in one major market that they will do the same here. So we haven't we have a range of different um enforcement actions we could be looking at and they may h come in different forms depending on how well each respective company is doing on compliance and improving compliance. um and um based on whether or not it will require enforcement action in the courts or something like an enforcable undertaking u might more be more appropriate wherever we get the best outcome in terms of lifting that compliance.