YouTube Joins Australia’s Social Media Ban for Children Under 16: A Bold Move to Protect Young Users
In a landmark decision, the Australian government has included YouTube in its world-first social media ban for children under 16, reversing an earlier exemption that had sparked heated debate. Set to take effect on December 10, 2025, this policy places YouTube alongside platforms like TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and X, requiring them to prevent users under 16 from holding accounts or face fines of up to A$49.5 million (approximately $32 million). This blog explores the context, implications, and controversies surrounding this decision, which has drawn both praise and criticism in equal measure.
The Context: A Growing Concern Over Online Harm
Australia’s push to restrict social media access for minors stems from mounting evidence of the harmful effects of online platforms on young people. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024, passed in November 2024, aims to shield children from issues like addictive behaviors, social isolation, sleep disruption, and exposure to harmful content such as misogyny, violent videos, and material promoting disordered eating or suicidal ideation.
The decision to include YouTube was heavily influenced by a survey from Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, which revealed that 37% of children aged 10 to 15 reported encountering harmful content on YouTube—more than on any other platform. The survey also noted that 76% of children in this age group used YouTube, highlighting its pervasive reach. Inman Grant emphasized YouTube’s “persuasive design features,” such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and algorithmic feeds, which she argued mirror those of other social media platforms and can lead users down harmful “rabbit holes.”
Initially, YouTube was granted an exemption due to its perceived educational value, as articulated by former Communications Minister Michelle Rowland. However, following Inman Grant’s recommendation in June 2025, the new Communications Minister, Anika Wells, reversed this stance, citing the platform’s risks to young users.
The Ban: What It Means for YouTube Users
Under the new law, children under 16 will be prohibited from creating or maintaining active YouTube accounts, which are required for uploading content, commenting, or subscribing to channels. However, they can still view videos in a logged-out state or under parental or educational supervision, ensuring access to educational content remains possible. The YouTube Kids platform, designed with safety restrictions like disabled comments and uploads, is exempt from the ban.
Social media platforms, including YouTube, must take “reasonable steps” to enforce the age restriction, with the government awaiting a report on age-verification technologies to guide implementation. While specifics remain unclear, Minister Wells has assured that users won’t need to upload sensitive documents like passports, suggesting alternative verification methods will be explored.
The Pushback: YouTube and Google Fight Back
YouTube, owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, has fiercely opposed its inclusion in the ban, arguing it is a “video-sharing platform” rather than a social media service. The company highlighted its educational benefits, noting that 69% of parents consider it suitable for children under 15, and emphasized its role in providing “free, high-quality content” often viewed on TV screens. YouTube also pointed to its safety measures, claiming it removed over 192,000 videos for violating hate and abuse policies in Q1 2025 alone.
Google escalated its response by threatening legal action, arguing that the ban could infringe on the implied constitutional freedom of political communication and limit young users’ ability to engage in online discourse. The company’s lobbying efforts included deploying representatives from The Wiggles, a beloved Australian children’s group, to argue for an exemption, and hosting a high-profile “Google at Parliament House” event on July 30, 2025, featuring YouTube creators like the Mik Maks. These efforts, however, failed to sway the government.
Minister Wells dismissed Google’s threats, stating, “We can’t control the ocean, but we can police the sharks, and that is why we will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids.” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that “social media is doing social harm to our children, and I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs.”
The Broader Implications
The inclusion of YouTube in the ban has sparked a polarized debate. Supporters, including parents and advocacy groups, view it as a necessary step to protect vulnerable children from harmful content and addictive algorithms. Albanese highlighted the emotional toll on families, standing alongside parents who lost children to online-related harms during the announcement. The move has also garnered international attention, with Norway adopting a similar ban and the UK considering one.
Critics, however, argue the ban is overly broad and could push children to unregulated corners of the internet. Some experts, as noted in a Conversation article, question its effectiveness, with four out of five consulted experts opposing YouTube’s inclusion due to its educational value and the challenges of enforcement. Privacy concerns have also emerged, with fears that age-verification technologies could lead to data breaches. Additionally, youth advocates worry that marginalized children, particularly in rural areas, may lose access to supportive online communities.
YouTube’s competitors, such as TikTok, Meta, and Snapchat, have expressed frustration, having previously criticized the initial exemption as a “sweetheart deal.” They argue that YouTube’s features, like its vertical video product similar to TikTok and Instagram Reels, make it indistinguishable from other social media platforms.
Challenges Ahead: Enforcement and Effectiveness
Enforcing the ban poses significant challenges. Age-verification technologies are not foolproof, and children may use tools like VPNs to bypass restrictions, as seen in France’s similar 2023 law. Inman Grant acknowledged that “no system is perfect,” but emphasized that the ban shifts the responsibility from parents to platforms. The eSafety Commission will issue guidelines to ensure compliance, with platforms required to report their progress.
The ban’s impact on YouTube’s vast user base—nearly three-quarters of Australian teens aged 13 to 15—remains uncertain. While the policy aims to curb harmful content, critics argue it may limit creative expression and access to positive resources. The government’s decision to exempt gaming platforms, messaging apps like WhatsApp, and health and education services reflects an attempt to balance safety with access to beneficial content.
Conclusion: A Test Case for Global Policy
Australia’s inclusion of YouTube in its under-16 social media ban marks a bold step in addressing online harms, but it also raises questions about feasibility, fairness, and unintended consequences. As the world watches, the policy’s success will hinge on effective enforcement and the ability to protect children without stifling their access to valuable resources. For now, the government stands firm, prioritizing the wellbeing of young Australians over the pressures of tech giants. As Albanese plans to pitch the ban at a UN conference in September 2025, Australia’s experiment could reshape global approaches to online safety.
