Credit: Christian Wiediger via Unsplash
Adland is divided over whether children under 16 should be banned from YouTube.
The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, has urged the government to rethink its decision to carve out YouTube from the social media ban which will apply to apps such as Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok.
YouTube’s public policy and government relations manager Rachel Lord has said the government should stick by its draft rules.
“This recommendation is in direct contradiction to the government’s decision to exempt YouTube from the ban,” she said.
“The government’s own research confirmed there was ‘broad agreement that YouTube is suitable for younger users’. 85% of children and 68.5% of parents said YouTube was appropriate for those aged 15 years and under, in contrast to social media companies TikTok, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat.
“YouTube is not a social media platform; it is a video streaming platform with a library of free, high-quality content, and TV screens are increasingly the most popular place to watch.”
Antonio Panuccio, head of data and technology at Enigma, said he can’t see the ban coming to fruition in December.
“Technologically, there’s no consensus on how it’ll work. Socially, parents and guardians are struggling to reconcile the benefits versus the harms. And politically, distrust in the platforms and the government to manage data means that anything identity-based is going to receive backlash,” he told AdNews.
“If the ban does actualise, reducing YouTube to merely a ‘video streaming platform with free, high-quality content’ grossly undermines its social feature set: likes and dislikes, comments sections, curated feeds, etc.
“That said, it’s still a fantastic repository for education and genuinely useful content. If I had to pick a side, I err against YouTube’s inclusion whilst recognising the algorithm and features need some reconfiguration for younger audiences.”
Chris Parker, CEO of Awaken, said he opposed a blanket ban on YouTube because of its educational value.
“My own children use it to explore the world, ask questions through Google Home, and engage with content that supports learning and curiosity. It’s a very different experience from scrolling on TikTok or Instagram, and there are already content checks in place for younger audiences,” he said.
“That said, anyone who’s left a kid with an iPad knows the algorithm moves fast. They can spiral from an innocent science video into something loud, strange, and over-stimulating in minutes. Before you know it, they emerge like a feral little gremlin.
“Just like with Netflix or gaming, it’s about supervision, boundaries, and time limits. There’s a pathway here for smarter, safer screen time, and we should be focused on supporting that, not banning a platform that can offer so much good, especially for kids in remote areas, rural communities, or those feeling isolated.”
Alfie Lagos, founder of Lexlab, said he keeps his kids off YouTube because the nature of user-generated content makes it “dangerous”.
“There have been cases where bad actors splice inappropriate content into cartoons like Bluey to trick the algorithm. In the end, it’s on us as parents to police what our kids see,” he said.
“Some parents aren’t aware of these tricks, which is where government regulation has a role. It shifts the default to safety.
“I don't think parents should be punished for letting their kids online, but a clearer boundary protects everyone.
Alberto Sanchez, head of media at Orange Line, said the legislation needs to be consistent across the board.
“If TikTok, Instagram and others are in the same category, YouTube should be too,” he said.
“YouTube has been aligning more with the social media trends, like introducing YouTube Shorts, and a lot of the trends that start on TikTok eventually end up on YouTube
“Consistency in how these platforms are treated ensures fairness and clarity, both for users and advertisers.”
Ori Gold, CEO of Bench Media, said his own daughter has stumbled across a Peppa Pig episode re-edited with violent and explicit content.
“YouTube’s pushback against the eSafety commissioner’s call to include it in the under-16 social media ban is yet another example of tech giants putting market share ahead of our children's safety,” he said.
“YouTube’s claim that a ban dismisses the needs of parents and teachers is disingenuous and deflects from the platform’s own responsibility.
“And their technical objections don’t stack up, it’s entirely feasible and already done in other environments and apps. Our children’s safety isn’t optional. As both parents and marketers, we need to say that loudly.”
Bryce Coombe, managing director at Hypetap, said the debate over YouTube’s inclusion in the social media ban shows the platform’s immense influence.
“This should be viewed as an opportunity for brands to be more strategic and scientific in their approach to how their brand can continue to engage an audience appropriately and authentically in channel,” he said.
“These sorts of reviews and regulations also already exist in the UK, France and Norway. What we’ve seen in those territories is that brands must understand how they operate within a broader media ecosystem, which requires a deeper understanding of how these channels interact, and what the consumer experience is like.
“For brands, the big need is to simply be more considered and data-informed. Brand safety and appropriateness should be a priority regardless of the channel, as should brand strategy informed by data.”
Phil McDonald, managing director at BCM, said the social networks and Google have a responsibility to work with the government.
“Given the huge scale of Google and Meta in Australia and the flex they enjoy on their current billing practices, I would like to see far more pro-activity and leadership from them in this space – rather than an automatic opposition to change,” he said.
“They clearly know their own technology capabilities in this space and they have a deep understanding of user data - it would be amazing to see them use their powers for good to protect young Australians from harmful content and tracking.
“Surely real leadership shown in this area by Google and the social media platforms will pay off with advertisers and users alike. Real Australians know this is a massive issue and they would respond positively to the tech media if they show leadership in finding a solution.”
Shah Ghaffurian, CEO of Magic, said the biggest issue is that kids under 10 are spending hours online watching questionable content that’s algorithmically served.
“While YouTube has long marketed itself as the ‘educational’ platform, it can quickly spiral into bizarre, overstimulating, and even disturbing territory; even on YouTube Kids,” he said.
“Teens who spend a lot of time on YouTube are about 12% more likely to feel disconnected from their friends than those on TikTok. Nearly 80% of teenage YouTube users report negative effects on their friendships. That’s higher than any other platform.
“It makes sense for regulators to treat YouTube the same way they do other social media. The content is just as sticky, just as influential, and arguably even more likely to fly under parents’ radar.”
Have something to say on this? Share your views in the comments section below. Or if you have a news story or tip-off, drop us a line at adnews@yaffa.com.au
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.