Interview with Steve Austin, ABC Brisbane Mornings

STEVE AUSTIN, HOST: The Federal Government has announced new rules for the tech giants - bringing in a trial where they're going to use AI to monitor what people are doing online to make sure they're above a certain age. Michelle Rowland is Australia's Communications Minister - I spoke to her earlier this morning and asked her about what they're doing.

MICHELLE ROWLAND, MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS: Steve, I know many of your listeners are very concerned about the impact of social media, particularly on children. It's a very live discussion right around Australia at the moment. So, what we are announcing today is that we have amended one of the key elements of our Online Safety Act – this is the primary law that regulates social media platforms, and gives power to the eSafety Commissioner. What this is called is the Basic Online Safety Expectations, or the BOSE. I announced in November last year that we would be reviewing the BOSE to ensure that it remained fit-for-purpose and kept pace with technological change - and what this actually does is impose something very important. 

Digital platforms don't like transparency, and that's why this BOSE Determination is so important. It gives the eSafety Commissioner a tool to understand what these companies are doing to keep Australians safe. It also requires reporting and sets out a series of expectations on online service providers, and we've brought that up to date and are announcing that today.

AUSTIN: Some of these people have GDP or income greater than the entire economy of Australia and they're not domiciled here. How do you enforce it? Say you're unhappy with one of them - say Facebook, you're unhappy, and you say - we want to see the Basic Online Safety Expectations, this is what we want, and they say, great, good luck, they're overseas. What can you do?

ROWLAND: It is a fact that these multinational companies with deep pockets - and in many cases they are highly litigious. But if they are operating in Australia, they are subject to Australian law. I think it's important to note that the amended BOSE Determination includes some very important expectations on online services that the eSafety Commissioner will be able to utilise. 

One of the key ones is that now the best interests of the child must be a primary consideration in the design and operation of any service that's likely to be accessed by children. Some of those your listeners will be familiar with, Snap, Twitch or Discord, for example. It's also a requirement that user safety be incorporated into the design and operation of generative AI, and that there's proactive measures taken to ensure that it is minimised how the extent to which technology can create harmful material. What I'm talking about here is deepfake, non-consensual images, for example. In answer to your question - irrespective of where these companies are domiciled, they are required to comply with Australian law. 

eSafety has been active in ensuring that these requirements are complied with, and I'm pleased to say that this has been welcomed by the eSafety Commissioner. There is also the potential for fines and court action. To date, it has resulted in tech platforms largely complying with the scheme, but again, this is about incremental improvements. It's using the tools that we have existing law to provide that transparency and accountability, which is so important.

AUSTIN: Let me ask you then about age verification for online pornography. Say the data shows that young boys - I mean really young - eight, seven, six - are viewing violent online pornography, and they grow up to be men who repeat it - you're bringing in an age verification trial - how will that work? How will that protect a young boy who's not being properly parented, who's under the age of consent, who's just simply typing in pornography into a Google search engine and coming up with whatever he or she wants?

ROWLAND: What you describe is unfortunately absolutely true. We know that younger people are viewing pornography at a younger age online than ever before, and this is also a resulting in some behaviours, particularly by young boys, that are being fed quite misogynistic material through recommender systems on the social media platforms. 

Unfortunately, it's not only pornography sites that are capable of showing this content, it's also the incidental viewing of online pornography through social media platforms. That's a serious issue, and that's precisely why we are proceeding with an age assurance trial. We have already said that there are several test cases that will be undertaken. They include access to age inappropriate material like online pornography, other age restricted services like some games and also social media. This will be an important element as part of our ongoing efforts to minimise those harms. But indeed, it is an area that has evolved very rapidly. 

We do have these tools within our capacity at the moment under the Online Safety Act, with the amended BOSE Determination, but also proceeding with this age assurance trial will be one that we do in conjunction with eSafety. 

AUSTIN. So, what does age assurance mean? I mean, is it just you tick a box and say – yes, I'm over 18, enter. How is that a barrier?

ROWLAND: No, that is not age assurance. Many of your listeners also would have seen this when they go to sites, for example, to order alcohol online where it's simply a click box and you enter your age and there's no actual verification there. Age assurance can range from anything from having documentation that actually confirms who a person is to artificial intelligence that's built into the technology which assumes from the types of activities of a user is able to actually give some estimation of their age. There's also biometrics that have been developing particularly rapidly over the past few months, and all of them come with the need to balance privacy and security concerns, but also their efficacy. So, it refers to a broad range of technologies, not necessarily just ticking a box as you described.

AUSTIN: Some states in the United States like the state of Utah, have banned social media based on age. Would the Federal Government consider banning teenagers from social media if they're under the age of 16 or even 18?

ROWLAND: We have been examining this question of what the right age is for social media, and we support age limits for social media use. The Government is going to consult with experts, researchers, parents, but also young people on the question of what is the right age. 

I am aware the Government has been monitoring closely some of these developments overseas, but it is also fair to say that there is not actually a jurisdiction where this has been implemented broadly and effectively as yet. There are laws that have been put in place, as you describe, but in terms of implementation, there is very little in terms of precedent in other countries. This issue is one Steve that is being grappled with by Governments and regulators around the world. This is why an age limit being imposed is really important and how we do that, that's where in our Budget - we announced a $6.5 million age assurance trial, and it's going to test those assurance technologies for their effectiveness and it's going to allow Government to better understand Australian's attitudes towards age assurance as well.

AUSTIN: Michelle Rowland is Australia's Communications Minister. Final question, not entirely unrelated - I just want to go to the Bruce Lehrmann trial, which went on for years, and what was subsequently revealed about Channel Seven allegedly having assisted in the purchase of possible prostitutes, possible cocaine, and the desire to keep Mr Lehrmann on side for the TV broadcaster. What does it take to lose a commercial TV licence in Australia if not that, Minister? 

ROWLAND: I think I will answer on the question of principle here. The Fourth Estate is critically important to a well functioning democracy, and our media sector, particularly our broadcasters, including our commercial broadcasters, play a very important role in that. I think it's incumbent on all aspects of the media to examine the way in which they're conducting themselves. There are a number of broadcasters that have been the subject of media commentary for their internal operations at the moment - but I stand by principle here - Australians deserve the best functioning fourth estate. This will become particularly important. 

As we have seen, we're talking about the platforms. We've had Meta's announcement in the last few months that they are withdrawing from news in Australia. Unless we have good quality public interest journalism, Australians will suffer as a result, as will our democracy overall.

AUSTIN: But what came out of the Lehrmann trial was not good journalism - it was something else altogether. I'll ask the question again - what does it take to lose a commercial television licence in Australia, if not as a result of what we've heard?

ROWLAND: Well, these are matters for the independent regulator - the ACMA - to investigate and enforce as it sees fit. As Minister, my focus is on ensuring that we have a public interest journalism sector in Australia that continues to flourish and continues to serve the interests of all Australians.

AUSTIN: Minister, thanks for your time.

ROWLAND: Pleasure.