Speaker 1: Good evening, Welcome to this special edition of six News
Speaker 1: from the Olivio Tourist Park in camera on.
Speaker 2: Leon Leonardo Paglizi was just eleven years old when he
Speaker 2: founded six News.
Speaker 1: Overnight on Tuesday, Boris Johnson became the leader of the
Speaker 1: Conservative Party.
Speaker 3: And the British PM, defeating Jeremy hunt.
Speaker 2: Leo is now sixteen and his online streaming news channel
Speaker 2: has a team of around a dozen reporters, some are
Speaker 2: as young as fourteenth.
Speaker 1: We're going to be covering all of this and we
Speaker 1: want to get first to our team of reporters. We
Speaker 1: of course have eight in Chcombe, Stuart, Jeffrey, Maggie Perry
Speaker 1: and Roman McKinnon, and we'll be going to Roman first.
Speaker 1: He is in Morton Bay. Were there.
Speaker 2: The six News's whole operation could be in jeopardy because
Speaker 2: some very powerful people think some of those reporters are
Speaker 2: too young to be on social media. From Schwartz Media,
Speaker 2: I'm Ashlin McGee. This is seven AM. There are a
Speaker 2: number of campaigns running at the moments concerned about the
Speaker 2: effect social media is having on young people, from exposure
Speaker 2: to harmful content, to mental health issues, cyberbullying, depression and
Speaker 2: even suicide, and the proposed solution is simply to ban
Speaker 2: anyone under sixteen from social media for their own protection.
Speaker 2: But could it even work today? Chief anker and Managing
Speaker 2: director of six News Australia, Leo Puglezi, on what he
Speaker 2: thinks of the idea and why even the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: seems to be backing it. It's Tuesday, May twenty eighth, Leo.
Speaker 2: You've got a big operation running there, and underage labor
Speaker 2: is a pretty big part of it.
Speaker 1: Isn't it is? It is a pretty big part of it,
Speaker 1: and I'm glad no authorities have caught on yet. But
Speaker 1: it's a pretty it's a pretty good news room that
Speaker 1: we've got running, you know, about a dozen people based
Speaker 1: right around the country and also one in Toronto as well.
Speaker 1: And you know, we've been going for about five years now,
Speaker 1: where you know, we've had people in Perth, in Tasmania,
Speaker 1: in Victoria, a lot in New South Wales and Queensland
Speaker 1: as well, and I think we've been growing, you know,
Speaker 1: pretty steadily. We've been managing people, you know, some younger
Speaker 1: than me, some people thirteen and others who are you know,
Speaker 1: doing their university studies and you know, we've been going
Speaker 1: for long enough that multiple of our reporters are actually
Speaker 1: at the age we're they're now able to be picked
Speaker 1: up by major networks. And you know, I'm not the
Speaker 1: biggest fan of poaching, but it is a pretty good
Speaker 1: thing that I'm really glad to see it happen.
Speaker 2: But there's a bigger threat to your existence at the moment, too,
Speaker 2: isn't it. Talk to me a bit more about that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So it's this new proposal that we've seen, and
Speaker 1: again it's kind of a it's a broad proposal in
Speaker 1: the sense that the restrictions and the details that haven't
Speaker 1: all been ironed out and unified. But the basic thing
Speaker 1: is a restriction on the age for social media for
Speaker 1: kids now obviously present day, it is thirteen on most
Speaker 1: major platforms that I've seen, right, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, I
Speaker 1: will leave they're all thirteen, Facebook and Instagram the same.
Speaker 1: But from what we've heard, the government is talking about
Speaker 1: extending that to sixteen. Now isn't officially a federal government proposal. This,
Speaker 1: this is the kind of weird thing.
Speaker 4: Our next guest is very important to a topic that
Speaker 4: we launched yesterday. The initiative called thirty six months. We
Speaker 4: need you go to thirty six months dot com dot AU.
Speaker 4: We want you to sign the petition. The petition that
Speaker 4: says we need to change the age that kids can
Speaker 4: join social media from thirteen to sixteen. We went through
Speaker 4: the statistics.
Speaker 1: The Prime Minister has fully endorsed it being up by
Speaker 1: thirty six months, which would take it to under sixteen.
Speaker 4: Prime Minister, could you go to thirty six months dot
Speaker 4: com DOTU and sign the petition for us.
Speaker 1: I can't sign petitions because they're to me, but we.
Speaker 4: Want your name on it. We want your name on
Speaker 4: it to say that you clearly understand what we're going
Speaker 4: to do, because you can pull the trigger. I assure
Speaker 4: you I am very supportive of the work that is
Speaker 4: taking place, and I would encourage people to What.
Speaker 1: That would do would effectively ban half our newsroom and
Speaker 1: some of the most significant people in it from participating
Speaker 1: in it. They wouldn't be able to be on social
Speaker 1: media where we communicate the most, which would be a
Speaker 1: pretty big, pretty big change for us. And that extends
Speaker 1: to a couple of people, right that's our national affairs
Speaker 1: that are Austin Polky basically runs half the life production
Speaker 1: and we're live every single day on the hour, every hour.
Speaker 3: Treasurer Jin Chamas has handed down this year's budget for
Speaker 3: the twenty twenty four twenty five financial year.
Speaker 1: There's problem number one that would be a pretty big
Speaker 1: loss for us. Our political editor Roma mckinn who's with
Speaker 1: us for a while, and now he'd also have to go.
Speaker 1: And he actually interviewed Scott Morrison and Anthony Albanesi in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two before the federal election. He'd be gone
Speaker 1: missed Albanese.
Speaker 3: Is Roman McKinnon here, federal political reporter. You said at
Speaker 3: the start of the campaign that you're not Scott Morrison
Speaker 3: and don't run away from press conferences. Yet days later
Speaker 3: you walked out of a press conference rather just eight
Speaker 3: minutes in. Well, journalists continue to ask you questions. Did
Speaker 3: you break your promise?
Speaker 5: Not at all, I've I never said I.
Speaker 1: There's a couple others as well. Maggie Perry, our election reporter,
Speaker 1: she is with us for all the election nights and
Speaker 1: plenty of other election previews as well, gone as well.
Speaker 1: What are you expecting? Well, I really can't see any
Speaker 1: pathway for a labor majority or anything like that point.
Speaker 3: I think the liberals.
Speaker 1: If this band went ahead, right, you would have our
Speaker 1: fifteen year old reporters would be off Twitter, where we
Speaker 1: communicate most of the time and that's where we organize things,
Speaker 1: that's where we plan our live coverage, that's where we
Speaker 1: plan election coverage. They'd be gone from that. And also
Speaker 1: they wouldn't be able to interact with any of our viewers,
Speaker 1: which is really important because Twitter is one of the
Speaker 1: largest places we have a following. It's where a lot
Speaker 1: of these reporters post breaking news and we're able to
Speaker 1: get that out. And it's just quite an extraordinary proposal
Speaker 1: because it's not just talking about taking kids off Instagram,
Speaker 1: TikTok and Twitter, but it's talking about banning from YouTube.
Speaker 1: And when six News we started, and mind you, for
Speaker 1: the first year or so, it was the uploads were
Speaker 1: under parent supervision. I will stress that, but I was
Speaker 1: eleven when the YouTube channel started. There would be no
Speaker 1: six News if this band was in place a couple
Speaker 1: of years ago. So let me get this right.
Speaker 2: One of your reporters can interview the Prime Minister for
Speaker 2: your social media channels, and yet the Prime Minister's saying, yeah, Na,
Speaker 2: we don't trust you on social media.
Speaker 1: It is pretty weird. It is pretty bizarre. And look,
Speaker 1: I mean the Prime Minister and we had them on
Speaker 1: just before the election where he was elected. You know,
Speaker 1: he said he would come back on six News if
Speaker 1: he was elected. You know, but he's praising us for
Speaker 1: our work at mind you. I was fourteen at the
Speaker 1: time of the interview as well. He's praising us for
Speaker 1: our work. But you know, he just doesn't think that
Speaker 1: we're mature enough to have a Twitter account or a
Speaker 1: YouTube account. It just makes no sense when you scratch
Speaker 1: the surface.
Speaker 2: I mean to give you a bit of pushback on that.
Speaker 2: Some people might hear this and go, oh, well, you know,
Speaker 2: Leo Puglezi is just a media baron speaking for her
Speaker 2: from his own self interest here.
Speaker 1: Well, maybe I am, but also like, I have no
Speaker 1: personal stake in it in the sense that I'd be
Speaker 1: banned with this proposal. And I will of course say
Speaker 1: that these fifteen year old reporters we have they will
Speaker 1: be sixteen soon ish. But in general it's just a
Speaker 1: bizarre proposal. And when I think about mind you, of course,
Speaker 1: you know you seven and eight. For me starting high school,
Speaker 1: it was remote learning that has changed things. You can
Speaker 1: say for better or worse of social media and use
Speaker 1: and the amount of time people spend online. But you know,
Speaker 1: I just can't imagine what it would be like if
Speaker 1: I didn't have Instagram at that age, because you know,
Speaker 1: using a boom a frase. Kids these days they don't
Speaker 1: communicate via phone calls or even just text messages, whichat
Speaker 1: via Instagram or some do via discord or whatever. And
Speaker 1: it is twenty twenty four. Social media action, interactions and
Speaker 1: communication that is normal for us, even though I know
Speaker 1: the Prime Minister said he wants kids to act in
Speaker 1: in normal ways. You can have you know, your directivities,
Speaker 1: you should have your directivities. You can have all that
Speaker 1: without banning kids from communicating with each other on Instagram
Speaker 1: or just having a social media profile if the age
Speaker 1: loomits thirteen right, and with the current restrictions they have,
Speaker 1: which is just enter your birth date or click are
Speaker 1: you over insert age here? Depending on the site. That
Speaker 1: doesn't work. You can take that from experience. That doesn't work.
Speaker 1: The only other way you could make it work is
Speaker 1: if you put in a lot of ID and a
Speaker 1: lot of information that all users would have to have
Speaker 1: in now. I don't see that happening either given there
Speaker 1: are plenty of understandable privacy concerns and safety concerns with
Speaker 1: giving all your data to Twitter at the moment, which
Speaker 1: seems to be falling apart on its best days, or
Speaker 1: just any site. And again I just don't think it's
Speaker 1: worth all that effort to ban from these platforms when
Speaker 1: mind you, there are so many other initiatives that you
Speaker 1: could put it in place that could work here in
Speaker 1: terms of making sure kids are safe without having to
Speaker 1: ban them, because I guarantee you a band will only
Speaker 1: spur them on, especially especially if we're thinking a bit
Speaker 1: more specific, for a thirteen or a fourteen year old
Speaker 1: who is banned for at least a year until they
Speaker 1: turn sixteen or whatever, and you just think, well, they've
Speaker 1: just had it taken away from them. It's not going
Speaker 1: to work.
Speaker 2: After the break the political strategy behind raising the age Leo,
Speaker 2: it feels like this story about raising the age of
Speaker 2: kids on social media is everywhere at the moment. Where's
Speaker 2: it come from? Are we even having this discussion right now?
Speaker 1: Look, we had seen this develop for a couple of
Speaker 1: days right the South Australian Premier Peter Malanowsk has really
Speaker 1: kicked it off. He's proposing a bit more moderate which
Speaker 1: is under fourteen's men, which is barely change from what
Speaker 1: it is now.
Speaker 5: And it's not about being a trogoloid eye or anything,
Speaker 5: but I think it's about making sure that for children
Speaker 5: under the age of fourteen, they're not getting access to
Speaker 5: these platforms where we know it's doing them harm.
Speaker 1: And then look, we have seen a pretty big increase
Speaker 1: in this conversation in the media and polity over the
Speaker 1: past week, especially in a lot of the news Corp newspapers.
Speaker 5: News Corp Australia is launching a new national campaign aimed
Speaker 5: at protecting young Australians from the dangers of social media.
Speaker 1: That let Them Be Kids campaign is called It's a
Speaker 1: good thing to have on the headlines, a big campaign
Speaker 1: launched by all the newspapers that gets clicks. That's why
Speaker 1: it was also on radio and you've got the thirty
Speaker 1: six months website.
Speaker 6: How good made of Mine? And radio broadcaster Michael Whippat
Speaker 6: Whipfley has gone on a bit of a rampage which
Speaker 6: I'm loving.
Speaker 1: It's called thirty six months.
Speaker 6: He wants to increase the age restriction of kids getting
Speaker 6: on to social media from thirteen to sixteen.
Speaker 1: That's why you get Anthony up and easy On to
Speaker 1: endorse it, and then that gets a lot more attention.
Speaker 1: It got my attention. A lot of it of course,
Speaker 1: is coming from post pandemic. Right. We've had all these
Speaker 1: discussions about the impact of being online too much in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty and twenty twenty one, and look, I don't
Speaker 1: doubt that either. I think though, there is a bit
Speaker 1: of confusion and mixed conversation about the differences between kids
Speaker 1: spending too much time inside and online and kids being
Speaker 1: addicted to a certain social media platform or kids you know,
Speaker 1: being unsafe on social media platform. In some ways, they
Speaker 1: are different conversations. But again, when you scratch the surface,
Speaker 1: there are just so many problems with it, and again
Speaker 1: there are just so many other ways that you could
Speaker 1: protect kids through social media and help keep them safe. Education,
Speaker 1: of course is a big thing, and of course education
Speaker 1: goes both ways. Right, we're talking about parents in this conversation.
Speaker 1: We'll educate parents. So many parents that are digitally illiterate,
Speaker 1: so on mine to be honest, LEO, why.
Speaker 3: Do you reckon?
Speaker 2: So many politicians are throwing their weight behind it, Like
Speaker 2: what's in it For someone like Anthony Albanezi, why would
Speaker 2: they back it.
Speaker 1: Well, look, it's a good way again to say that
Speaker 1: you're doing something in terms of supporting parents, it's a
Speaker 1: good way to say you're protecting kids, you know. And
Speaker 1: mind you, in terms of the people who would be
Speaker 1: banned by it, well, they're not voters yet and so
Speaker 1: it's a nice way to say that you're doing all that.
Speaker 1: It gets you a good lot of attention, to Midie,
Speaker 1: I have seen pretty much every government minister in the
Speaker 1: book and premiere talking about this over the past few weeks.
Speaker 1: It's getting a lot of attention. It's getting a lot
Speaker 1: of opposition attention as well. It's a good way to,
Speaker 1: of course try to get the opposition on side and
Speaker 1: pass something through easily. But again i'll just backtrack into
Speaker 1: what I said before. It is just a good way
Speaker 1: to say that we're doing something, even if it might
Speaker 1: actually not be because what are you going to do
Speaker 1: when the fourteen year old who has banned signs up
Speaker 1: with a different birth year and still can access the
Speaker 1: harmful material that you're talking about stopping again, it's not logical.
Speaker 1: Anyone who knows, you know, teenages will tell you that
Speaker 1: they will be spurred on by being told that you
Speaker 1: can't do something, or you can't access this, or you
Speaker 1: can't have an account on that.
Speaker 2: I think the part of this that isn't in dispute
Speaker 2: is that there are some really serious and significant harms
Speaker 2: to young people's mental health from different social media platforms
Speaker 2: to various extents, for various people. But Leo, you're someone
Speaker 2: who's pretty exposed on social media, and I wonder if
Speaker 2: you worry at all about the impact on your own
Speaker 2: mental health.
Speaker 1: Look for me personally, I mean, I've seen a lot
Speaker 1: of you know, nasty comments over the years. Right, these
Speaker 1: are just the haters and losers of Twitter. Right. Look,
Speaker 1: there have been messages to kill myself. I've had a
Speaker 1: couple of those. There's been some threats to go to
Speaker 1: my school. I do keep my school anonymous, but there's
Speaker 1: just been general comments. So over like four years I've
Speaker 1: been on Twitter, where it's either and this extends from
Speaker 1: when I was thirteen to you know, now sixteen going seventeen,
Speaker 1: Comments mentioning genitalia, comments that are just generally inappropriate, comments
Speaker 1: about parents, just you know, really weird, creepy comments, and
Speaker 1: it's just amazing how me reporting the news, you know,
Speaker 1: impartially running six news has managed to you know, noise
Speaker 1: so many people. It's incredible. I don't completely understand why
Speaker 1: these people have such weird reactions. So look, I cop
Speaker 1: it all the time. I'm not saying it's taken a
Speaker 1: toll or anything like that. I feel like I'm again
Speaker 1: maybe not the right word, but coping fine, right, And
Speaker 1: so for me personally, I'm able to deal with it fine.
Speaker 1: But again that goes back to what I said in
Speaker 1: terms of the fact that each child, each teenager, reacts
Speaker 1: to a comment differently. A seventeen eighteen year old could
Speaker 1: take an awful comment on Twitter a lot worse than
Speaker 1: a fourteen year old or a thirteen year old or
Speaker 1: a fifteen year old. It's all about the individual, which
Speaker 1: again parents and their kids will only know that best.
Speaker 1: And so, yeah, you're right, it's not in dispute that
Speaker 1: there can be impacts on kids' mental health because of
Speaker 1: social media. I'm not disputing that myself, but it really
Speaker 1: just is down to the individual, which is why I
Speaker 1: don't see how a blanket being could actually address it
Speaker 1: if we're talking about keeping kids safe, because I will
Speaker 1: remind everyone that there are kids who feel more safe
Speaker 1: in a social media community. Maybe it's because they've got
Speaker 1: problems at home or problems at school, and they feel
Speaker 1: like they're able to be safe and expressive on social
Speaker 1: media fifteen sixteen year olds, And I don't see how
Speaker 1: taking that away would help them. And again, especially if
Speaker 1: we're talking about an issue with their own family, it's
Speaker 1: not like they can just go to their family instead
Speaker 1: of social media and some of these circumstances, which again
Speaker 1: it goes back to it, a blanket band does not work.
Speaker 1: It will not work. Leo.
Speaker 2: Thanks so much for your time.
Speaker 1: It's great to be here.
Speaker 2: Also in the news today, administrators for the budget airline
Speaker 2: Bonza have been given a two months deadline to try
Speaker 2: to sell it in a federal court hearing yesterday. Bonza's
Speaker 2: fleet of planes has remained grounded after the company unexpectedly
Speaker 2: canceled all flights in April. It's since been revealed to
Speaker 2: be one hundred and ten million dollars in debt and
Speaker 2: more than three hundred staff face an uncertain future, and
Speaker 2: Lisa Wilkinson is seeking one point eight million dollars from
Speaker 2: Channel ten to cover illegal fees in defending the defamation
Speaker 2: claim brought by Bruce Lehman against both the network and
Speaker 2: her the presiding judge. Just as Michael Lee said, he
Speaker 2: hoped Ten and Wilkinson's lawyers could sit down with some
Speaker 2: quote yellow and blue highlighters and come to an agreement themselves,
Speaker 2: but Wilkinson's lawyers appeared unconvinced, saying they believe Ten had
Speaker 2: a reluctance to pay us anything. I'm Ashlin McGee. This
Speaker 2: is seven am, and we'll see you again tomorrow.
Speaker 4: Hello,