Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has called on the Albanese Government to reverse its decision to exclude YouTube from the country’s upcoming under-16s social media ban, warning that the platform poses similar risks to other apps like TikTok and Instagram.
Inman Grant’s fresh advice to Communications Minister Anika Wells states that exempting the Google-owned platform is “not consistent with the purpose of the [social media minimum age] obligation to reduce the risk of harm”.
“Given the known risks of harm on YouTube, the similarity of its functionality to other online services, and without sufficient evidence demonstrating that YouTube predominately provides beneficial experiences for children under 16, providing a specific carve out for YouTube appears to be inconsistent with the purpose of the Act,” she wrote.
The minimum age law, which comes into effect in December 2025, will ban under-16s from accessing social media, with platforms required to implement age assurance tools. While the initial legislation included YouTube, a last-minute exemption was made following personal lobbying by YouTube’s global CEO to then-Communications Minister Michelle Rowland.
YouTube’s exclusion has been heavily criticised by rival platforms, with TikTok’s director of public policy for Australia and New Zealand, Ella Woods-Joyce, likening it to “banning the sale of soft drinks to minors but exempting Coca-Cola.”
Inman Grant will reinforce her concerns in a speech to the National Press Club on Tuesday, citing data from a survey of 2,600 children aged 10 to 15 conducted by her office. “Alarmingly, around seven in 10 kids said they had encountered harmful content, including exposure to misogynistic or hateful material, dangerous online challenges, violent fight videos, and content promoting disordered eating,” she is expected to say.
“YouTube was the most frequently cited platform in our research, with almost four in 10 children reporting exposure to harmful content there”.
Inman Grant will also reference a recent New York Times report claiming that YouTube “surreptitiously rolled back its content moderation processes to keep more harmful content on its platform, even when the content violates the company’s own policies.”
She will argue that platform-specific exemptions are unworkable due to “rapidly evolving” technologies and a “shifting risk profile” across platforms. Features like infinite scroll, auto-play, and algorithmically curated feeds, common to YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, should be targeted by the regulation, she will claim.
In addition, Inman Grant’s advice recommends that the government amend the wording of the legislation to better address harms caused by design features like “endless content feeds, notifications, stories and streaks,” which disproportionately affect children.
Minister Wells confirmed she had requested the eSafety Commissioner’s advice on the draft Online Safety (Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms) Rules 2025. Her office released Inman Grant’s advice ahead of the commissioner’s press club appearance.
“Social media companies have a social responsibility and the safety of young Australians is our priority”.
New research released last week further supports the Government’s stance on age assurance. The Age Assurance Consumer Research Report, conducted by the Social Research Centre, surveyed nearly 4,000 Australians and found “nearly 9 in 10 Australians backing the use of age assurance technology to restrict children’s access to harmful online content.”
“This research shows Australians widely support our world-leading age restrictions on social media for under 16s and have strong expectations of platforms when it comes to data protection and security,” Wells said.
“While some of the findings around the risk of harm for children on social media are alarming, it’s positive to see Australian children support age assurance practices.
“The research also highlights social media companies must work harder to build trust in their data management practices.
“Our Government knows social media age-restrictions will not be the end-all be-all solution for harms experienced by young people online but they will make a significant impact.”
While YouTube did not provide an official comment on the matter, it did defend its exemption from Australia’s upcoming under-16s social media ban, arguing it is a video platform—not a social network—and has long invested in age-appropriate experiences and safety tools.
The platform highlights features like YouTube Kids, teen supervision settings, and disabled comments on “made for kids” content, as well as a 22 per cent year-on-year increase in harmful content removals. With 84 per cent of Australian teachers using YouTube for education, it maintains its value outweighs the risks, pushing back on suggestions the exemption should be reversed amid pressure from rival social media companies.
With the December rollout on the horizon, the government now finds itself at the centre of a growing debate, balancing expert advice, platform pushback and the complex question of what online safety should look like for Australia’s youngest users.
