MATTHEW PANTELIS:
These days it's all different. Let's talk about influencers. They've been in the news here in South Australia for a range of reasons, but apparently, there's some who are ‑ well, in fact, people regularly, it seems, dob them in to the ACCC for giving misleading or wrong advice, the ACCC having a crackdown on influencers whose influence is misguided, it seems. And the Federal Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones is on the line. Morning, Minister.
JONES:
Good morning, Matt, good to be with you.
PANTELIS:
Yes, likewise. Now, the ACCC is going to have its hands full with this, because influencers, how do you even find them to crack down on them?
JONES:
A lot of these people have been reported to the ACCC as either taking cash for comments or making misleading statements online, and since we did a Digital Platforms Review which published a report a few months ago, this is, commercial behaviour online and particularly on social media platforms is very much in our focus. You would know as a radio announcer that if you're promoting a product online and you're getting money to do that ‑ I'm not saying that you ever would, or ever have ‑ but if you were to, you'd have to declare that upfront.
PANTELIS:
Absolutely.
JONES:
And look, it just seems to us that there's a bit of misdirection, misleading behaviour going on if you're not declaring whether you're getting cash or a benefit for products that you're promoting online, and secondly, are you making misleading statements; are you making false and misleading statements. The General Consumer Law isn't just applying to bricks and mortar commerce, it applies to things you do online as well.
PANTELIS:
All right. So influencers specifically, do they have to be declared as an influencer? Do they out themselves as it were by putting down "influencer" on their social media profile, is that how you ‑ because there's a lot of misleading stuff on social media, and to be an influencer, is one follower enough, or is it 100,000, you know, where do you draw that line?
JONES:
It would be more than one, that's for sure, and I think the thing that really enlivens our attention is whether there's a commercial arrangement going on between, you know, whether it's, I don't know, a makeup manufacturer and an influencer, or a holiday promoter and an influencer. So I think it's the commercial relationship, somebody being paid or incentivised to do promotions online; I think they're the ones that we're interested in, and you can assume that any business that is paying somebody to advertise their gear wouldn't be doing it if they had one follower.
PANTELIS:
Yeah, correct, yeah. That's correct.
JONES:
They'd be more attracted to somebody with hundreds of thousands of followers.
PANTELIS:
Yeah. So, the ACCC over misleading advice, then you've got the ATO, on the other hand, saying, "Well, you're not declaring this" and obviously you can match it up?
JONES:
That is exactly right, and the ATO is having a good look at what the incomes that are being earned and perhaps not declared on‑line, so that is absolutely relevant, and the ATO's obviously got their own issues as well with, you know, scams being promoted on TikTok and other social media platforms as well. So, I think the take‑out your listeners can get from this is that we're increasingly focussed on what's going on online, and just because you're doing it on something that might look like a fun social media platform, whether it's Instagram or Facebook, Snapchat or TikTok, the same rules apply, and you can't dodge the Australian Consumer Law just because you're doing it on a funky social media platform.
PANTELIS:
Yeah. And once you publish it, same laws apply, don't they, publishing laws, you can libel someone online, just as you can in a newspaper, or dare I say on radio.
JONES:
That's exactly right. So I think we're having a ‑ it's a big project to work with over the course of the year to ensure that ‑ we want to ensure that innovation continues, that people are able to do the cool stuff they're doing online and on their social media platforms, but we just want to ensure that it doesn't become an avenue where the general law is breached or broken or ignored. The law's got to apply right across the board.
PANTELIS:
Have you got enough staff to do this, because the Internet, the social media side of it, is basically ‑ well, it's like the Universe, it's expanding without end?
JONES:
It's true that there is a challenge when you're trying to look at these things online, and the government has limited resources. I think the majority of people want to do the right thing and the regulator's behaviour – perhaps in doing this ‑ in doing the sweep of social media accounts over the course of this week, yes, it's about catching people who are doing the wrong thing, but it's also about sending a message to the community that, you know, this isn't some law‑free zone; the Internet is not a law-free zone, social media platforms aren't a law-free zone, and general consumer laws play, and the laws, as you said, of defamation and libel, and all of that sort of stuff, they apply online as well.
PANTELIS:
Indeed. All right. Appreciate your time this morning, thank you. Stephen Jones, Federal Assistant Treasurer on a crackdown on the so-called influencers, people that say: "Look, I've tried this product, it's fantastic," whether they're telling you online that they've been paid to basically say that, whether they’re declaring their income to the tax department, it's all up for examination, and good on the government for doing it, because as the Minister says, the Assistant Treasurer says, these people acting on‑line, well, they're not exempt from the laws that you and I are subject to, doing our normal day‑to‑day jobs. It applies across the board and great, I think that’s an excellent move.