Irish Examiner view: YouTube ban a challenge to platforms
The move has not pleased Google-owned YouTube, but Australia’s communications minister has simply pointed to that country’s e-safety commissioner statement.
Australia has announced a ban on children having their own YouTube channels starting this December, rowing back on an earlier decision to exempt the video-sharing platform from its social media restrictions for under 16s.
The move has not pleased Google-owned YouTube, which has pointed to that earlier exemption amid suggestions it may yet take legal action, but Australia’s communications minister has simply pointed to that country’s e-safety commissioner statement that YouTube should be included in the ban because it poses a threat to young people. They will still be able to watch videos, but not upload or interact with content.
This is an interesting decision not just because it reflects the overwhelming evidence suggesting that social media platforms are a corrosive influence on younger people. From the scraping of personal data to exposing the vulnerable to bullying on a scale never seen before, these platforms have inflicted havoc on young people and children for years.
It is also interesting because YouTube has deigned to offer a defence of its position, claiming it is “a video-sharing platform, not a social media service, that offers benefit and value to younger Australians”, which is a disingenuous representation of its position. YouTube and other platforms, which are included in this ban, such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and X, are past masters at depicting themselves as platforms rather than publishers, side-stepping any sense of responsibility for the material on those platforms.
A case in point surfaced in recent days in Ireland. Yesterday morning, An Garda SĂochána's assistant commissioner Paul Cleary stated that “very inaccurate reports” began circulating online in the wake of an attack on a garda the previous evening. He urged the public to get their news only from credible sources: “Unfortunately we see it every day and we have some people with their own agenda trying to use incidents like this to inflame situations for their own ends.”
Such experiences only serve to expose how social media platforms avoid their responsibilities and undercut those companies’ wishes to be seen as a positive influence. Enforcing a ban such as that announced by Australia may present its own challenges, but we in Ireland should certainly keep an eye on this situation to see if we can apply similar restrictions here.
Readers paying out for various TV and streaming subscriptions may feel outnumbered by the ranks of those using “dodgy boxes”, a crowd which appears to rival those claiming to have been in Thomond Park to see Munster beat the All Blacks in 1978.
This sometimes appears to be one of the last laws which can be disregarded with impunity — get a friend to spend 10 minutes hooking up your television to a small device and spare yourself those pesky bills forever more.
Are the authorities beginning to clamp down harder on those operating these boxes? This week a court ordered a Wexford man to pay €480,000 in damages to Sky after conceding a High Court action taken by the broadcaster and telecommunications giant over his operation of a dodgy box streaming service. If that seems a stiff price to pay, it should be pointed out that the person concerned does not appear to have been an individual using a single box for his own purposes but was previously described by Sky as a “top level” copyright infringer who may have earned up to €450,000 per year from operating the streaming service.
It should be stressed that using a dodgy box may appear to some to be a victimless crime, a minor offence that people can justify to themselves in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis — but it is still theft, and those using such boxes are thieves. The excuses and justifications deployed by the owners of such dodgy boxes cannot be used to steal food, energy, or accommodation, for instance.
Bypassing the payment systems to enjoy television programming for free is not just illegal, but it undermines the very product being enjoyed. Television production — like film, radio or newspaper production — is an expensive business, labour intensive and costly in terms of technology. If consumers do not pay for the end product, then they are exploiting those who are working to produce it.
It would be an interesting experiment to challenge those using dodgy boxes to work for nothing, or to provide goods and services without recompense. Or to hear them explain why others should do so.
We are deep in festival season, with all sorts of events flowering across Ireland. One festival with a very different feel to it takes place this week in CĂşil Aodha in West Cork.
Féile na Laoch (The Festival of Heroes) celebrates our cultural heroes and was inspired by the life and work of one of Ireland’s cultural giants, Seán Ó Riada.
Held every seven years, one of its key events is An AerĂocht, an all-night show which starts at 7pm this evening with a parade from Ă“ Riada’s home to CĂşil Aodha. An AerĂocht features the likes of singers Celine Byrne and Liam Ă“ MaonlaĂ, Altan’s MairĂ©ad NĂ Mhaonaigh, jazz musician John Donegan, dancers Natasha Bourke, Tobi Omoteso, and Siobhán NĂ DhuinnĂn, novelist and playwright CĂłnal Creedon, and poet Dairena NĂ ChinnĂ©ide.
First held in 2011, this is the third FĂ©ile na Laoch, and clearly the experience involved is different to typical festival activities such as camping in a leaky tent and buying overpriced band T-shirts. Good to see local and national culture celebrated in such an innovative way.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
