Audio Excerpt - Leo Puglisi, 6 News:

“Good evening. Welcome to this special edition of 6 News from the Alivio Tourist Park in Canberra. I'm Leonardo Puglisi.”

ASHLYNNE:

Leonardo Puglisi was just 11 years old when he founded 6 News.

Audio Excerpt - Leo Puglisi, 6 News:

“Overnight on Tuesday, Boris Johnson became the leader of the conservative party and the British PM, defeating Jeremy Hunt in a landslide…”

ASHLYNNE:

Leo's now 16, and his online streaming news channel has a team of around a dozen reporters, some are as young as 14.

Audio Excerpt - Leo Puglisi, 6 News:

“We are going to be covering all of this, and we want to get first to our team of reporters. We of course have in Edgecombe, Stewart Jeffrey, Maggie Perry and Roman McKinnon, and we'll be going to Roman first. He is in Morton Bay where there are…”

ASHLYNNE:

But 6 News’ whole operation could be in jeopardy, because some very powerful people think some of those reporters are too young to be on social media.

[Theme Music Starts]

ASHLYNNE:

From Schwartz Media, I’m Ashlynne McGhee. This is 7am.

There are a number of campaigns running at the moment concerned about the effects of social media on young people.

From exposure to harmful content, to mental health issues, cyberbullying, depression, and even suicide.

And the proposed solution is to simply to ban anyone under 16 from social media, for their own protection. But could it even work?

Today, Chief Anchor and Managing Director of 6 News Australia Leo Puglisi, on what he thinks of the idea, and why even the Prime Minister seems to be backing it.

It’s Tuesday, May 28.

[Theme Music Ends]

ASHLYNNE:

Leo, you’ve got a big operation running there and underage labour is a pretty big part of it, isn’t it?

LEO:

It is. It is, you know, a pretty big part of it and I'm glad no authorities have caught on yet. But it's a pretty, it's a pretty good newsroom that we've got running. You know, about a dozen people based right around the country and also one in Toronto as well. And, you know, we've been going for about five years now where, you know, we've had people in Perth, in Tasmania, in Victoria, a lot in New South Wales and Queensland as well. And I think we've been growing, you know, pretty steadily. We've been managing people, you know, some younger than me, some people 13 and others who are, you know, doing their university studies and, you know, we've been going for long enough that multiple of our reporters are actually at the age where they're now able to be picked up by major networks. And, you know, I'm not the biggest fan of poaching, but it is a pretty good thing and I'm really glad to see it happen.

ASHLYNNE:

But there’s a bigger threat to your existence at the moment too, isn’t there? Talk to me a bit more about that.

LEO:

Yeah, so it's this new proposal that we've seen, and again it's kind of a, it's a broad proposal in the sense that the restrictions and the details that haven't been ironed out and unified. But the basic thing is a restriction on the age for social media for kids. Now, obviously, present day it is 13 on most major platforms that I've seen, right? Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, I believe they're all 13. Facebook and Instagram the same. But, from what we've heard, the government is talking about extending that to 16. Now, it isn't officially a federal government proposal, this is the, kind of, weird thing.

Audio Excerpt - Nova Radio Host:

“Our next guest is very important to a topic that we launched yesterday, the initiative called 36 months. We need you to go to 36months.com.au. We want you to sign the petition, the petition that says we need to change the age that kids can join social media from 13 to 16. We went through the statistics here…”

LEO:

The Prime Minister has fully endorsed it being up by 36 months, which would take it to under 16s.

Audio Excerpt - Nova Radio Host:

“Well Prime Minister, could you go to 36months.com.au and sign the petition for us?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“I can’t sign petitions because they’re to me.”

Audio Excerpt - Nova Radio Host:

“We want your name on it to say that you clearly understand what we’re gonna do here, cause you can pull the trigger.”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“I assure you, I am very supportive of the work that is taking place, and I would encourage people…”

LEO:

What that would do would effectively ban half our newsroom, and some of the most significant people in it, from participating in it. They wouldn't be able to be on social media where we communicate the most, which would be a pretty big, pretty big change for us. And that extends to a couple people, right? That's our national affairs editor, Austin Pollock. He basically runs half the live production, and we're live every single day on the hour, every hour.

Audio Excerpt - Austin Pollock:

“Federal treasurer Jim Chalmers has handed down this year’s budget for the 2024/25 financial year…”

LEO:

There's problem number one, that would be a pretty big loss for us. Our political editor, Roman McKinnon, who's been with us for a while now, he'd also have to go. And he actually interviewed Scott Morrison and Anthony Albanese in 2022 before the federal election, he'd be gone.

Audio Excerpt - Roman McKinnon:

“Mr Albanese, it’s Roman McKinnon here, federal political reporter. You said at the start of the campaign that you’re not Scott Morrison and don’t run away from news conferences, yet days later you walked out of a press conference rather just 8 minutes in, while journalists continued to ask questions. Did you break your promise?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Not at all, I’ve uh, I never said I’d…”

LEO:

There's a couple others as well. Maggie Perry, our election reporter. She, you know, is with us for all the election nights and plenty of other election previews as well, gone as well.

Audio Excerpt - 6 News Host:

“What are you expecting?”

Audio Excerpt - Maggie Perry:

“Well I really can’t see any pathway for a Labor majority or anything like that at this point. I think the Liberals might…”

LEO:

If this ban went ahead, right, you would have our 15 year old reporters would be off Twitter, where we communicate most of the time. And that's where we organise things; that's where we plan our live coverage; that's what we plan our election coverage, they’d be gone from that, and also they wouldn't be able to interact with any of our viewers, which is really important because Twitter is one of the largest places we have a following. It's where a lot of these reporters post breaking news, and we're able to get that out. And it's just quite an extraordinary proposal, because it's not just talking about taking kids off Instagram, TikTok and Twitter, but it's talking about banning from YouTube. And when 6 News was started, and mind you for the first, you know, a year or so it was, the uploads that were under parents supervision, I will stress that, but I was 11 when the YouTube channel started. There would be no 6 News if this ban was in place a couple years ago.

ASHLYNNE:

So let me get this right, one of your reporters can interview the Prime Minister for your social media channels, and yet the Prime Minister is saying, yeah nah, we don't trust you on social media?

LEO:

It is pretty weird, it is pretty bizarre, and look, I mean, the Prime Minister, when we had him on just before the election where he was elected, you know, he said he would come back on 6 News if he was elected. But he’s praising us for our work, mind you I was 14 at the time of the interview as well, he's praising us for our work but, you know, he just doesn't think that we're, you know, mature enough to have a Twitter account or a YouTube account. It just makes no sense when you scratch the surface.

ASHLYNNE:

I mean, to give you a bit of pushback on that, some people might lhear this and go, oh, well, Leo Puglisi is just a media baron speaking from his own self-interest here.

LEO:

Yeah, well, maybe I am but also, like, I have no personal stake in it in the sense that I'd be banned with this proposal. And, I will of course say that these 15 year old reporters we have, they will be 16 soon-ish, but in general it's just a bizarre proposal. And when I think about, mind you, of course, you know, year seven and eight for me, starting high school, it was the remote learning that has, you know, changed things you can say, for better or worse in terms of social media use and the amount of time people spend online. But, you know, I just can't imagine what it would be like if I didn't, you know, have Instagram at that age. Because, you know, using a boomer phrase, kids these days, they don't communicate via phone calls or even just text messages. We chat via Instagram, or somebody via Discord or whatever. And it is 2024, social media interactions and communication that is normal for us, even though I know the Prime Minister said he wants kids to act in normal ways. You can have, you know, your outdoor activities, you should have your outdoor activities, you can have all that without banning kids from communicating with each other on Instagram, or just having a social media profile.

If the age limit is 13, right, and with the current restrictions they have, which is just enter your birthdate or click are you over insert age here depending on the site, that doesn't work. You can take that from experience, that doesn't work. The only other way you could make it work is if you put in a lot of ID, and a lot of information that all users would have to have in. Now, I don't see that happening either, given there are plenty of understandable privacy concerns and safety concerns with giving all your data to Twitter at the moment, which seems to be falling apart on its best days, or just any site. And again, I just don't think it's worth all that effort to ban from these platforms when, mind you, there are so many other initiatives that you could put in place that could work here, in terms of making sure kids are safe without having to ban them. Because I guarantee you a ban will only spur them on, especially, especially if we're thinking a bit more specific, for a 13 or a 14 year old who is banned for at least a year until they turn 16 or whatever. And you just think, well, they've just had it taken away from them. It's just, it's not going to work.

ASHLYNNE:

After the break, the political strategy behind raising the age.

[Advertisement]

ASHLYNNE:

Leo, it feels like this story about raising the age of kids on social media is everywhere at the moment. Where has it come from? Why are we even having this discussion right now?

LEO:

Look, we had seen this develop for a couple days, right? The South Australian Premier, Peter Malinauskas, really kicked it off. He's proposing, a bit more moderate, which is under 14 ban which is, you know, barely changed from what it is now.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Malinauskas:

“It’s not about the troglodyte or anything, but I think it’s about making sure that, you know, for children under the age of 14, they're not getting access to these platforms where we know it’s doing them harm.”

LEO:

Look, we have seen a pretty big increase in this conversation in the media and politicians over the past week, especially in a lot of the News Corp newspapers.

Audio Excerpt - News Corp Presenter:

“News Corp Australia is launching a new national campaign aimed at protecting young Australians from the dangers of social media. The Let Them Be Kids campaign is calling on the federal government to…”

LEO:

It's a good thing to have on the headlines, a big campaign launched by all the newspapers, that gets clicks. That's why it was also on radio and you’ve got the 36 months website.

Audio Excerpt - Nova Radio Host:

“Now, a good mate of mine and radio broadcaster Michael ‘Whippa’ Wipfli has gone on a bit of a rampage, which I'm loving. It's called 36 months. He wants to increase the age restriction of kids getting on to social media from 13 to 16, hence the 36 months.”

LEO:

That's why you get Anthony Albanese on to endorse it and then that gets a lot more attention. It got my attention. A lot of it, of course, is coming from post-pandemic, right? We've had all these discussions about the impact of being online too much in 2020 and 2021. And look, I don't doubt that either. I think, though, there is a bit of confusion and a mixed conversation about the differences between kids spending too much time inside and online and kids being addicted to a certain social media platform, or kids, you know, being unsafe on social media platforms. In some ways they are different conversations. But again, when you scratch the surface, there are just so many different problems with it. And again, there are just so many other ways that you could protect kids through social media and help keep them safe. Education, of course, is a big thing. And of course education goes both ways, right? We're talking about parents in this conversation, well educate parents. So many parents are digitally illiterate. So are mine, to be honest.

ASHLYNNE:

Leo, why do you reckon so many politicians are throwing their weight behind it? Like, what's in it for Anthony Albanese? Why would they back it?

LEO:

Well, look, it's a good way again to say that you're doing something in terms of supporting parents. It's a good way to say you're protecting kids. You know, and mind you in terms of the people who would be banned by it, well they're not voters yet. And so, it's a nice way to say that you're doing all that. It gets you a good lot of attention, and mind you, I have seen pretty much every government minister in the book and premier talking about this over the past few weeks. It's getting a lot of attention. It's getting a lot of opposition attention as well. It's a good way to, of course, try to get the opposition onside and pass something through easily. But again, I'll just backtrack into what I said before, it is just a good way to say that we're doing something, even if it might actually not be. Because what are you going to do when the 14 year old who was banned signs up after with a different birth year and still can access the harmful material that you're talking about stopping. Again, it's not logical. Anyone who knows, you know, teenagers will tell you that they will be spurred on by being told that you can't do something, or you can't access this, or you can't have an account on that.

ASHLYNNE:

I think the part of this that isn’t in dispute is that there are some serious and significant harms to young people's mental health from different social media platforms, and of course, to various extents for various people. But Leo, you’re someone who is pretty exposed on social media and I wonder if you worry at all about the impact on your own mental health.

LEO:

Look, for me personally I mean, I've seen a lot of, you know, nasty comments over the years. These are just the haters and losers of Twitter, right? Look, there have been messages to kill myself, I've had a couple of those. There's been some threats to go to my school, I do keep my school anonymous. But there's just been general comments over like 4 years I've been on Twitter where it's either, and this extends from when I was 13 to when I, you know, now 16 going 17, comments mentioning genitalia, comments that are just generally inappropriate, comments about parents, just, you know, really weird, creepy comments. And it's just amazing how me reporting the news, you know, impartially running 6 News has managed to, you know, annoy so many people. It's incredible, it's, I don't, you know, completely understand why these people have such weird reactions. So look, I cop it all the time. I'm not saying it's taken a toll or anything like that, I feel like I’m, again maybe not the right word, but coping fine, right? And so for me personally, I'm able to deal with it fine. But again, that goes back to what I said in terms of the fact that each child, each teenager, reacts to a comment differently. A 17 or 18 year old could take an awful comment on Twitter a lot worse than a 14 year old, or a 13 year old, or a 15 year old. It's all about the individual, which again, parents and their kids will only know that best.

And so yeah, you're right, it's not in dispute that there can be impacts on kids mental health because of social media. I'm not disputing that myself, but it really just is down to the individual, which is why I don't see how a blanket ban could actually address it if we're talking about keeping kids safe. Because I will remind everyone that there are kids who feel more safe in a social media community. Maybe it's because they've got problems at home or problems at school, and they feel like they're able to be safe and expressive on social media, 15, 16 year olds. And, I don't see how taking that away would help them. And again, especially if we're talking about an issue with their own family, it's not like they can just go to their family instead of social media in some of these circumstances. Which again, it goes back to it: a blanket ban does not work. It will not work.

ASHLYNNE:

Leo, thanks so much for your time.

LEO:

It's great to be here.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

ASHLYNNE:

Also in the news today...

Administrators for the budget airline Bonza have been given a two-month deadline to try to sell it in a Federal Court hearing yesterday.

Bonza’s fleet of planes has remained grounded after the company unexpectedly cancelled all flights in April.

It’s since been revealed to be $110 million dollars in debt and more than 300 staff face an uncertain future.

And,

Lisa Wilkinson is seeking 1.8 million dollars from Channel 10 to cover her legal fees in defending the defamation claim brought by Bruce Lehrmann against both the network and her.

The presiding judge, Justice Michael Lee, said he hoped Ten and Wilkinson’s lawyers could sit down with some, quote, “yellow and blue highlighters”, and come to an agreement themselves. But Wilkinson’s lawyers appeared unconvinced, saying they believed Ten had a “reluctance to pay us anything“.

I’m Ashlynne McGhee, this is 7am and we’ll see you again tomorrow.

[Theme Music Ends]