Major technology companies, including Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat, have raised strong objections to the Australian government’s decision to exempt YouTube from its new law that bans children under 16 from using social media platforms.

The controversial legislation, passed in November 2024, mandates that social media companies prevent underage users from logging in or face significant penalties. However, the exemption granted to YouTube has sparked backlash from competing platforms, who argue that it contradicts the very purpose of the law, Reuters reported.

The law, hailed as a world-first move to curb online harm among children, is designed to tackle concerns about social media addiction, cyberbullying, and exposure to harmful content.

While platforms like Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, and Snapchat are required to implement strict age verification measures, YouTube remains accessible under a family account with parental supervision. This decision has ignited criticism from rival tech giants, who claim that YouTube provides similar features—such as algorithm-driven content recommendations and user interaction—that the ban seeks to regulate.

Meta has been particularly vocal, asserting that YouTube’s exemption creates an unfair playing field in the digital space. The company contends that if platforms like Facebook and Instagram are being held accountable for their potential risks to children, YouTube should not be treated differently.

TikTok and Snapchat have echoed these concerns, questioning the consistency of the law and arguing that no single platform should receive preferential treatment, especially when the risks associated with online engagement apply broadly across the industry.

Mental health experts have also weighed in on the debate, warning that YouTube can be just as addictive and potentially harmful as any other social media platform. Studies suggest that algorithm-driven content on YouTube can lead children into dangerous online rabbit holes, exposing them to inappropriate or distressing material despite parental controls. Critics argue that allowing YouTube to operate freely under the new law weakens the legislation’s overall effectiveness in safeguarding children’s mental well-being.

On the other hand, proponents of the exemption argue that YouTube is fundamentally different from traditional social media. Unlike Instagram or TikTok, which emphasize direct social interaction, YouTube is primarily a video-sharing platform with vast educational resources. Many parents and educators rely on the platform for its learning content, and banning it outright could limit access to valuable digital education tools.

As the debate intensifies, the Australian government has yet to issue a formal response to the concerns raised by tech companies. However, mounting opposition from both industry leaders and child safety advocates suggests that the controversy is far from over.

With the enforcement of the new law set to begin in mid-2025, all eyes are now on Australian regulators to see if they will reconsider YouTube’s exemption or stand firm on their decision.

The battle over YouTube’s status in Australia’s landmark social media law highlights the growing global challenge of regulating online platforms while balancing digital freedom, educational access, and child safety.