We cannot raise digitally literate children by locking them out of the digital world.

Media Release | 23rd October | FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Banning under-16s form social media “won’t protect children and will erode freedom and privacy” says PILLAR

Civil-liberties organisation PILLAR says a members bill drawn today proposing to ban under-16s from social media will not protect children online and will instead create serious privacy risks and restrict online freedom for all New Zealanders. Harms facing young people are real, but the solution can't be to create a larger problem.

“Banning under-16s from social media will not protect children online,” says Nathan Seiuli, Executive Director of PILLAR. “It will only create major privacy risks and reduce online freedom for everyone.”

Seiuli says government overreach and heavy-handed regulation of private companies will not make children safer. “Incentivising platforms to play it safe through fines and restrictions will, as we’ve seen before, lead to censorship and the removal of legitimate speech and expression.”. Two bills around digital safety were drawn and it’s a timely prompt for us to engage the debate. 

“Aligning with international efforts may sound responsible, but it is lazy policymaking. Digital safety experts overseas have already warned that these measures are unlikely to help and more likely to cause unintended harm. Leading with blunt bans, restrictions, and punishments for platforms will only drive over-regulation and damage the open nature of the internet.”

The definition set out in the bill is another major concern. “It’s far too broad, and that’s part of the problem,” Seiuli says. “What about news sites with comment sections? Or platforms that allow logged-out viewing? Or event gaming platforms with chat functions. These could all be captured under the same definition of social media, creating confusion and extending regulation far beyond what is intended.”

In its October submission, PILLAR outlined how the government could protect children online without sacrificing freedom or privacy. The organisation recommended strengthening parental authority, improving digital literacy, applying App Store and device-level controls, and maintaining a targeted focus on illegal content rather than lawful expression.

“Broad campaigns against so-called ‘harmful’ content will inevitably become subjective tools of censorship,” Seiuli says. “Such measures would suppress legitimate speech and violate New Zealanders’ right to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind, as protected under Section 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.”

The proposal also raises serious privacy concerns through mandatory age-verification and ID checks. PILLAR warns that restricting under-16s would require every user to prove their age, effectively ending online pseudonymity and invading the privacy of all users. 

“Bans will face three clear hurdles immediately. Workarounds by teens, more friction for adults, and less privacy for everyone,” Seiuli says. “Pursuing it suggests a greater interest in control than in genuinely caring for children. We cannot raise digitally literate children by locking them out of the digital world.”

ENDS

Media contact: Nathan Seiuli, nathan@nzpillar.com, 021-485-449