Latest news with #TanyaPlibersek
Sky News AU
7 hours ago
- Politics
- Sky News AU
Labor's under-16 YouTube account ban an incoherent mess that overlooks the hostile, addictive scourge of online video game streaming
Anthony Albanese's government crossed a dangerous line on Wednesday by adding YouTube to Australia's under-16 social media blacklist. This represents state paternalism at its most intrusive—bureaucrats in Canberra deciding which digital platforms serve children's interests and which threaten their development. The mechanics reveal the policy's absurdity. Children will still be able to watch YouTube in a logged-out state, but they can't fully engage with it. No uploads, no comments, no subscriptions. It's like letting teenagers attend a concert but forcing them to wear noise-cancelling headphones. They can see the lights, feel the crowd, but they're cut off from the sound, the soul of the experience. A digital muzzle, enforced not for safety, but for control. All because of their age. Although it's flawed, YouTube is still humanity's most valuable classroom. You'll find MIT lectures next to language lessons, history deep dives, and programming bootcamps. But under this ban, a curious 15-year-old can watch advanced chemistry but can't ask questions or join a study group. They can sit at the back of the room, but they're barred from raising their hand. They're locked into passive consumption, exactly the opposite of how real learning happens. Cabinet minister Tanya Plibersek struck a defiant tone, insisting Australia won't be bullied by tech giants threatening legal action. But her bravado misses the point. If the concern is algorithmic manipulation, then go after the algorithms. YouTube already offers restricted modes and detailed parental controls. Real reform would strengthen those, not resort to blunt-force bans. eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant defended the crackdown, labelling YouTube a primary gateway for harmful content. But that argument falls apart with the slightest scrutiny. By that logic, every medium with mixed-age audiences becomes a threat. Libraries contain books inappropriate for children, some with graphic violence, sexual content, or dangerous ideologies. Yet, we don't bulldoze libraries. We guide children to age-appropriate shelves. Television airs adult material every night; we don't outlaw TVs. We create time slots, ratings, and parental locks. In every other domain, we understand that access demands guidance, not prohibition. Children aren't barred from parks because danger might be present. They're taught how to cross the street. A healthy society supports and supervises; it doesn't censor. This policy does the opposite. It targets the tool, not the misuse. It confuses control with care, and in doing so, punishes promise instead of protecting children. Its incoherence betrays its intent. Gaming platforms, arguably the most addictive and hostile environments online, get a free pass. These are spaces flooded with unmoderated voice chats, rage-filled rants, and grooming risks masquerading as friendship. Predators don't need to look far; they just need a headset and a username. Still, no restriction. Discord remains untouched, too, despite being ground zero for underground communities, extremist recruitment, and private messaging between minors and strangers. Servers spawn faster than they can be policed. But no crackdown there. Meanwhile, YouTube—the largest free classroom on Earth—gets blacklisted. Chemistry lectures, language tutorials, history deep-dives—all gone in any meaningful sense, because of a comments section that can already be disabled. None of this makes sense. Australian families deserve effective safeguards. What they're given instead is a blunt instrument disguised as policy. A meaningful solution should start in schools. Digital citizenship must be taught like reading or math. This should be non-negotiable. Kids need to learn how to protect their privacy and identify manipulation. They must be shown how to navigate the online world with awareness. Parents also need help—practical tools, clear guidance, and support to set boundaries without dampening curiosity. Regulations should focus on real threats, such as shady algorithms, deceptive design, and hidden loopholes, instead of banning entire platforms out of fear. And then comes the enforcement nightmare. Platforms will be expected to verify every user's age without building massive ID databases that endanger the privacy of all Australians. It's an impossible brief. Today's teenagers move through digital loopholes effortlessly. They fake birthdates. They borrow older siblings' logins. They deploy VPNs to spoof their location and skirt around firewalls. These are standard tactics. Lawmakers imagine compliance. Kids assume workarounds. And in that gap, real harm festers. Bans won't cure screen addiction. They won't fix chronic disconnection or declining youth mental health. For that, Australia needs to invest in real-world alternatives—community sports, arts programs, mentorship, safe physical spaces where teens can belong without a screen in their face. Punishing the outlet won't address the underlying issue. And this isn't just an Australian experiment. Norway has already followed suit. The UK is watching closely. If this becomes a global template, we'll be looking at state-directed censorship based on moral panic rather than evidence. The illusion of safety will come at the cost of access, autonomy, and education. Parents lose the right to guide. Children lose the chance to build resilience. When the ban lifts at 16, they're tossed headfirst into the full chaos of the internet without the judgment that only comes from experience. We wouldn't keep kids off roads until adulthood, then hand them the keys and expect zero crashes. But that's exactly what this policy does. Real protection means preparing young people for the world they already live in, not pretending we can block it out. Australia's policy isolates kids instead of educating them. It sidelines parents, ignores actual evidence, and creates more risk than it prevents. It's policy-by-panic, a handbook for helplessness. Australians must see this crackdown for what it is: not bold leadership, but blind overreach. John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist who writes on psychology and social relations. He has a keen interest in social dysfunction and media manipulation.
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
As Australia's teen social media ban looms, here's how the platforms are lobbying for an exemption
The Australian government will imminently announce which social media platforms will be included in the under-16s ban. The social services minister, Tanya Plibersek, on Monday said the government would not be 'bullied out of taking action by any social media giant'. But the tech companies are doing their best to argue that their services should be exempt from the legislation that comes into effect in December. Here's what the social media companies are doing to make their case. The parent company of Facebook and Instagram has been showcasing its teen account settings for Instagram as a not-so-subtle message to the government that it takes teen safety on its platform seriously. Last week, Meta announced new protections around direct messages, including blocking features, in addition to the existing protections around automatically censoring potentially nude images. Meta also hosted a 'screen smart' Instagram safety event for 'parent creators' in Sydney last week, hosted by Carrie Bickmore. Sign up: AU Breaking News email YouTube has been even less subtle. The platform was originally promised an exemption from the social media ban last year by then communications minister Michelle Rowland. The eSafety commissioner, however, last month recommended to the government that YouTube not be excluded, highlighting research showing when children encounter harmful material, it is on YouTube more than any other platform. Since then, the company has been in a lobbying blitz. In addition to full-page ads in newspapers and billboards across the country saying YouTube is in a 'category of one' of services for everyone, the company has sent a letter to the communications minister, Anika Wells, raising the threat of a high court challenge should YouTube be included in the ban. As Guardian Australia reported last month, Google this week will host its annual showcase in Parliament House on Wednesday, where content creators such as the Mik Maks – children's musicians who have argued against YouTube being included in the ban – will make an appearance and no doubt make their views known to the politicians. Last year's event featured the Wiggles, who met with Rowland. The meeting was mentioned in a letter the global CEO of YouTube, Neal Mohan, sent to Rowland last year pleading for an exemption less than 48 hours before the exemption was promised. Guardian Australia reported last week YouTube had also met with Wells this month to discuss the ban directly. This month TikTok has been running ads both on TikTok itself and on Meta's platforms about the educational benefits for teens on the vertical video platform. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion '1.7m #fishtok videos are helping them swap screen time for time outdoors,' one ad stated, in a nod to the government's claim that the ban will lead to children spending more time off their screens and outside. 'They're mastering their chef skills thanks to over 13m cooking videos,' it added. 'One in three are visiting the stem feed every week, inspiring their learning,' another stated. On the messaging app Snapchat, much of the focus has been on user safety. Guardian Australia reported in May that an 11-year-old Australian girl, who added random people on Snapchat as part of an informal competition with her best friend to get a high score in the app, went on to be sexually abused by one of the people she added. This month, Snap announced it had partnered with with the Australian federal police-led Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation for a series of educational videos rolled out on several Australian influencer accounts, as well as ads advising parents and teens how to spot grooming and sextortion. 'The safety of the Snapchat community has always been our priority, and working closely with law enforcement and expert safety partners is a critical part of that ongoing effort,' Ryan Ferguson, Snap's Australian managing director, said. The company also reiterated its teen account settings for 13 to 17-year-olds that include private accounts by default and in-chat warnings when communicating with someone with whom they don't share mutual friends or who is not in their contact list. So far, the government appears to be not for turning. 'There is no doubt that young people are being impacted adversely in their mental health by some of the engagement with social media and that is why the government has acted,' the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, told ABC's Insiders on Sunday. 'I'll be meeting with parents again this week of people who've been through tragedy, frankly … And one of the things that concerns some of the social media companies is that we are leading the world and I'm proud that we're prepared to stand these people up effectively from their threats.'
The Star
3 days ago
- Business
- The Star
Google threatens legal action if YouTube included in Australia's social media ban for children
CANBERRA: Google has threatened to take legal action against any move by the Australian government to include YouTube in its world-first social ban for children younger than 16. In a letter to Minister for Communications Anika Wells, executives from Google and YouTube's Australian office said the technology giant is "considering its legal options" if the federal government reneges on its previous decision to exempt YouTube from the social media ban. The letter, which was published by News Corp Australia newspapers, argues that YouTube is a video streaming platform rather than a social media platform and flags a legal challenge against its inclusion in the ban on constitutional grounds. Under the ban, which will take effect in December, platforms including Meta, TikTok and Snapchat will be required to take "reasonable steps" to prevent children younger than 16 from creating or accessing accounts. The federal government initially decided not to include YouTube in the ban due to its education and health content, but Australia's top online safety adviser, the eSafety Commissioner, in June said that no platform should be exempt. Asked on Monday (July 28) about Google's threat of legal action, Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek said that the government would not be "bullied" by technology companies. "We will do whatever we have to make sure Australian kids are kept safe," she told Seven Network television. "We're not going to be bullied out of taking action by any social media giant." Representatives from Meta, TikTok and Snapchat in March made submissions to the federal government criticising the decision to exempt YouTube from the ban. Companies that fail to prevent under-16s from accessing their social media platforms after the ban takes effect will face fines worth up to 50 million Australian dollars (US$32.8 million). - Xinhua
Hans India
4 days ago
- Business
- Hans India
Google threatens legal action if YouTube is included in Australia's social media ban for children
Canberra: Google has threatened to take legal action against any move by the Australian government to include YouTube in its world-first social ban for children younger than 16. In a letter to the Minister for Communications Anika Wells, executives from Google and YouTube's Australian office said the technology giant is "considering its legal options" if the federal government reneges on its previous decision to exempt YouTube from the social media ban. The letter, which was published by News Corp Australia newspapers, argues that YouTube is a video streaming platform rather than a social media platform and flags a legal challenge against its inclusion in the ban on constitutional grounds, Xinhua news agency reported. Under the ban, which will take effect in December, platforms including Meta, TikTok and Snapchat will be required to take "reasonable steps" to prevent children younger than 16 from creating or accessing accounts. The federal government initially decided not to include YouTube in the ban due to its education and health content, but Australia's top online safety adviser, the eSafety Commissioner, in June said that no platform should be exempt. Asked on Monday about Google's threat of legal action, Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek said that the government would not be "bullied" by technology companies. "We will do whatever we have to make sure Australian kids are kept safe," she told Seven Network television. "We're not going to be bullied out of taking action by any social media giant." Representatives from Meta, TikTok and Snapchat in March made submissions to the federal government criticising the decision to exempt YouTube from the ban. Companies that fail to prevent under-16s from accessing their social media platforms after the ban takes effect will face fines worth up to 50 million Australian dollars (32.8 million US dollars).
AU Financial Review
7 days ago
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Welfare recipients owe government $3b, Plibersek warned
Welfare recipients owe the Australian government $3 billion, according to a departmental warning to Tanya Plibersek about the financial and reputational risk of the growing backlog of debt. The Department of Social Services issued the warning in its incoming ministerial brief, blaming the complexity of welfare law and the difficulty collecting debts of more than three decades without significant reform.
