Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has formally recommended that YouTube be captured by the federal government’s social media ban for children under 16, challenging the platform’s current exemption and potentially reshaping the scope of the landmark legislation.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has written to Communications Minister Anika Wells arguing that YouTube should be subject to the same restrictions as platforms like TikTok and Instagram, despite the government’s initial decision to exempt the video-streaming service due to its educational value.

The recommendation comes as Ms Inman Grant prepares to address the National Press Club, armed with new research that positions YouTube as the primary source of online harm for young Australians.

Research Points to YouTube as Leading Source of Harm

The eSafety Commission’s latest research has revealed troubling patterns of youth engagement with digital platforms, with YouTube emerging as both the most widely used and most harmful platform for children.

“It’s almost ubiquitous that kids are on social media. By far the most prevalent social media site they’re on is YouTube,” Ms Inman Grant said. “

“And when we asked where they were experiencing harm and the kinds of harms they were experiencing, the most prevalent place where young Australians experienced harm was on YouTube — almost 37 per cent.”

The research found that 37% of young people experienced harm on YouTube, including exposure to misogyny, hate, violence, dangerous challenges, disordered eating, and suicidal content. Overall, 70% had encountered harmful content online.

YouTube Disputes and Government Response

YouTube has strongly contested the recommendation, with Rachel Lord from YouTube Australia and New Zealand defending the platform’s educational value and widespread classroom use.

“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,” Lord said. “

We urge the Government to follow through on the public commitment it made to ensure young Australians can continue to access enriching content on YouTube.” she said.

Ms Lord also emphasised that substantial evidence supports YouTube’s classroom applications and noted broad parental support for the platform.

A spokesperson for Minister Wells confirmed the recommendation is under active consideration. “The minister is carefully considering the eSafety Commission’s advice on the draft Social Media Minimum Age Rules,” the spokesperson said.

“Her top priority is making sure the draft rules fulfil the objective of the Act — protecting children from the harms of social media.”

Broader Regulatory Concerns

Ms Inman Grant’s letter to the minister extends beyond YouTube’s specific case, raising concerns about the current framework’s prescriptive nature.

She has called for clearer exemption criteria that would allow platforms posing little risk to children to be carved out from the ban.

Under current draft rules, platforms can gain exemptions by functioning as messaging apps, supporting online gaming, or having a “primary purpose of supporting the health and education of end-users.” YouTube is separately named as exempt in the legislation.

eSafety Commissioner argues for a new clause that would broadly exempt platforms posing minimal risk to children.

“This would ensure that services which do not meet any of the proposed purpose/use tests, but are nonetheless safer and potentially beneficial for children, are carved out from the [social media ban] obligation,” said Grant

Grant also noted that without such provisions, eSafety would likely exercise discretion not to enforce compliance for lower-risk services appropriate for young children.

Emerging Digital Threats

In her upcoming National Press Club address, Ms Inman Grant will outline additional digital threats facing young people, including concerns about artificial intelligence and chatbot interactions.

“Just as AI has brought us much promise, it has also created much peril. And these harms aren’t just hypothetical — they are taking hold right now,” she will say, according to excerpts of her speech.

The Commissioner highlighted alarming trends in AI companion usage among children, noting that eSafety issued its first Online Safety Advisory in February due to concerns about children as young as 10 spending up to five hours daily conversing with sexualised chatbots.

Industry and Political Response

Platforms currently targeted by the ban have previously expressed concerns about YouTube’s exemption, though specific details of their objections were not disclosed.

Shadow Communications Minister Melissa McIntosh criticised the timing of the recommendation, arguing the government is cutting it close to implementation.

“With just six months until these changes commence, it is disappointing the Government is only just now getting advice from the eSafety Commissioner,” she said.

While not taking a position on YouTube’s inclusion, Ms McIntosh emphasised the need for clarity. “In or out, the Government needs to make its position clear on the requirements for social media platforms and families to protect our kids from the vitriol that is so prevalent online.”

Implementation Challenges Ahead

The recommendation comes as preliminary findings from the government’s age-assurance trial have been delivered, exploring technological solutions for blocking young people from social media and adult websites.

Ms Grant indicated this represents valuable progress in developing enforcement mechanisms for the eventual ban.

The debate over YouTube’s status highlights broader challenges in defining social media platforms and determining appropriate regulatory responses to digital harms.

With implementation scheduled within six months, the government faces pressure to finalise the framework while balancing educational access against child safety concerns.

The recommendation also underscores growing recognition that traditional boundaries between social media platforms and other digital services may be inadequate for addressing contemporary online risks facing young people.