Confusion reigns as department disavows Youtube age ban exemption
The issue of a Youtube exemption from the under-16 social media ban has been handballed to the next communications minister in a departmental letter to digital platforms.
The letter from the Communications Department, first reported in Capital Brief, asserts that no social media platform has yet been exempted from the requirement to ban under-16s because the necessary rules have not yet been made.
(Midjourney)
This apparently contradicts reassurances from current Communications Minister Michelle Rowland to Google that Youtube would not be within scope. It also muddies an already confused situation where the government has signalled both that Youtube is unaffected and that the exemption decision has not yet been made.
At issue is whether Youtube, along with Tiktok, Facebook and Snapchat, will have to implement systems to block children under 16 accessing videos. The law, an amendment to the Online Safety Act overseen by the eSafety commissioner, stipulates big fines for breaking its provisions and will come into effect in December.
Youtube’s exemption has been mooted by Rowland all through the legislative process, and apparently confirmed in an email to Google (which owns Youtube) last December.
The exemption infuriates and mystifies competitor platforms.
Tiktok, in particular, has pointed out that the Youtube Shorts product is an almost exact replica of its own short video platform.
“The law is intended to keep young people safe and special exemptions, not based on evidence, undermine its intent,” Tiktok said in a statement.
Meta has also indicated to Mumbrella that parents and industry figures do not understand the reason for the Youtube exemption.
The letter from Communications Department First Assistant Secretary Sarah Vandenbroek sent to digital platform executives pointed out that Michelle Rowland is now officially “the former Minister for Communications” and that no formal exemption has been put in place.
The Online Safety Act requires that platforms exempted from the underage ban be specified in legislative rules that are tabled in federal parliament. The rules can be disallowed by parliament, meaning, for example, they could be knocked back in the Senate.
“While the former Minister for Communications proposed to exclude Youtube, no legislative rules have been made giving effect to this or any other exclusion from the minimum age obligation,” Vandenbroek said in the letter.
She said consultations with stakeholders had taken place through February and March and the department would be presenting the results of these consultations to the next government.
The stakeholders consulted included “young people, parents and carers, the digital industry, and child-development, mental health and legal experts.”
This is the specific wording in the legislation regarding the Minister’s ability to exempt social media from the age ban:
63C (6) Services that are not age-restricted social media platforms
An electronic service is not an age-restricted social media platform if:
(a) none of the material on the service is accessible to, or delivered to, one or more end-users in Australia; or
(b) the service is specified in the legislative rules.
63C (7) Before making legislative rules specifying an electronic service for the purposes of paragraph (6)(b):
(a) the Minister must seek advice from the Commissioner, and must have regard to that advice; and
(b) the Minister may seek advice from any other authorities or agencies of the Commonwealth that the Minister considers relevant, and may have regard to any such advice.
Have your say