Credit: Dole777 via Unsplash
Meta has opposed a proposal to exempt YouTube from its social media age laws.
The social media ban for children under 16 was passed in parliament last year, citing widespread safety concerns from parents.
Labor is now doing a “closed door consultation” to refine the rules, with hopes they will be formulated by mid-year.
Platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Reddit and X, will have until December to comply or face fines of up to $50 million.
Communications minister Michelle Rowland initially said YouTube would be banned, but later indicated the video platform may be given an exemption because of its educational uses.
Big tech rivals have argued that YouTube has all the same features that the government has deemed unsafe, including algorithmic content recommendations, never-ending autoplay and persistent notifications and alerts.
Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, said the notion of exempting YouTube “makes a mockery” of the government’s stated intention to protect young people.
“We are concerned the government's rapid, closed-door consultation process on the minimum age law is undermining necessary discourse,” a Meta spokesperson said.
“The government has proposed that YouTube be exempt from the law, despite its own research showing YouTube is the most popular social media service for under 16 year olds in Australia.
“A young person with a YouTube account experiences the very features cited by the government to justify the law, including algorithmic content recommendations, autoplay, social interaction features, and persistent notifications, as well as access to harmful content.
“YouTube’s exemption is at odds with the purported reasons for the law and we call on the government to ensure equal application of the law across all social media services.”
TikTok said the move would be “illogical, anti-competitive, and short-sighted” in a submission to the government, likening it to “banning the sale of soft drinks to minors but exempting Coca-Cola”.
“Excluding any major platform by name from the minimum age obligation on educative grounds is unsupportable without evidence,” the platform said.
“What is clear is that the Government has begun its analysis from the starting position that YouTube must be exempt and then attempted, half-heartedly, to reverse-engineer defensible supporting evidence. The results leave much to be desired.
“The Government's standalone, named exemption for only one platform, is irrational and indefensible... a sweetheart deal for just one platform won't help the Government protect kids online; it will only hurt young Australians in the long run.”
AdNews contacted Snap for comment.
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.