“It feels a bit off-balance,” said Rogowski, who went on to point out that children already have many other damaging freedoms online where they are more exposed to danger and not protected.
So, there's a chance something could be getting lost in translation and I don't know the context here, but just taking this article's description at face value,
[Paraphrasing], "Kids can voluntarily be exposed to explicit content on the internet, so why do we need guardians around when I act creepy towards them (it's my job, no really)" seems like both a tellingly weird rant trigger for this guy and first line of argument in defense of it