Labor minister Anika Wells refuses to release research behind eSafety's radical push to ban YouTube for young teens
The lack of transparency means that stakeholders and the public have no idea why Labor is considering banning 15-year-olds from one of the most fundamental, and most visited, platforms on the internet.
The eSafety regulator has repeatedly blocked attempts by SkyNews.com.au to access the research, instead opting to drip feed highlights of the data to the public over the coming months, even though Labor's decision is expected in weeks.
SkyNews.com.au is challenging this refusal through Freedom of Information laws.
It comes amid growing transparency concerns over the conduct of Commissioner Julie Inman Grant and Ms Wells.
"The minister is taking time to consider the eSafety Commissioner's advice," a spokesperson for Ms Wells told SkyNews.com.au.
"The minister has been fully briefed by the eSafety Commissioner including the research methodology behind her advice."
The eSafety Commissioner's own methodology report outlines significant limitations in the data used in the recommendation, including bias and misreporting concerns.
The "Keeping Kids Safe Online: Methodology" report concedes the data was based entirely on self-reported responses collected at a single point in time.
The report highlights that the survey used 'non-probability-based sampling' from online panels, admitting these 'are convenience samples'.
The results therefor 'may be subject to a range of biases' compared to more robust, random sampling methods.
'Participants may answer survey items in a manner they think is socially desirable or acceptable, as opposed to providing a true reflection of their attitudes or experiences,' the report said.
It adds that one in five children had parental assistance in completing the survey, further risking skewed or filtered responses.
Despite these limitations, Ms Wells is weighing whether to reverse the Albanese government's previously stated position for a YouTube exemption from the ban.
Former communications minister Michelle Rowland exempted YouTube from the ban on social media for under-16s, and it was endorsed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
The exemption has since been called back into review by Ms Inman Grant, despite her unwillingness to share the research underpinning a possible YouTube ban.
The social media ban will take effect in December 2025 covering platforms including TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, X, and Snapchat.
Shannon Jones, creator of the globally popular children's YouTube channel Bounce Patrol, has expressed renewed concern about the possible government backflip.
'I reached out to them last year when they were first considering it and had some conversations then,' she told SkyNews.com.au.
'This time around I've sent communications to the minister but haven't heard back because everything is just being done so fast... It's getting so rushed through.
'It's all being considered and decided in the space of a week it feels like... All of the consultation that was done with stakeholders last year is not getting repeated.
'It seems like there hasn't been much conversation with stakeholders this time to learn all those nuances so that's been really disappointing as well.'
A decision by the Albanese government on whether to implement the YouTube ban is expected in the coming weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
We didn't get that rate relief, but Australia remains the lucky country
The reason the Reserve Bank can be a bit more indulgent on its monetary policy in future is because the inflation monster has largely been tamed, and this has been achieved without any debilitating increase in unemployment. Loading So there is another tick. And while many economies are panicking about the effects of Donald Trump's imposition of tariffs and their rising inflationary impact, evidence suggests that Australia, perversely, will be a net beneficiary of this otherwise debilitating trade policy. Of course, the uncertainty of the ad hoc and rapidly changing and unpredictable imposition of US trade levies brings with it uncertainty for all countries including Australia, and raises the risk of slower global growth. But according to a report this week from the Productivity Commission, its modelling shows that if one excludes the impact of uncertainty, 'the proposed US tariff changes could have a small, positive effect on Australia's economy. The results suggest that cheaper imports from the rest of the world, and an outflow of productive capital from the US and highly 'tariffed' economies, would slightly increase Australian production.' It was only a few months back that headlines screamed of the damage that would be wrought by tariffs on our steel and aluminium. These fears were, of course, overblown given our exports of these products account for less than a combined $1 billion a year. Rather, the Productivity Commission found that US 'Liberation Day' tariffs and tariffs on aluminium, steel and automobiles and parts could lead to an increase in Australian real GDP of 0.37 per cent. It says that the impact of Trump's tariffs would be negative on Australia if our government sought to impose retaliatory tariffs, but there is no suggestion that the Albanese government would do so. Thus, by several measures Australia is sitting in a sweet spot relative to many – if not most – other countries. Loading The largest shadow on the horizon is the potential fall in demand from China for Australian iron ore and the associated decline in its price. This would play poorly for Australia's sovereign balance sheet, putting pressure on the budget deficit. Based on an expected rate cut next month of 25 basis points to 3.6 per cent, a $600,000 mortgage would cost $100 a month less and take to $300 the monthly savings since the Reserve Bank started easing monetary policy in February. And while the US market was rattled and fell by almost 1 per cent on Monday night about the prospects of large tariffs being placed on Japan and South Korea, the extension of a deadline to August 1, 2025, suggests a better trade agreement over the next couple of weeks.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Don't go to university next year. Just don't
This breaks my heart. I spent my entire young parenthood urging my children to study hard and go to university. Silver bullet, I said. It will change your life, your heart and your mind, I said. Hell, I did the same to myself as I ground my way through a PhD. This was the pinnacle. Hard work, surrounded by smart people urging me to push myself. Just two years ago, I was walking through the grounds of a gorgeous sandstone university with my grandchildren. You'll be going here one day, I heard myself say earnestly. (Yep, tiger mothers turn into tiger grandmothers.) Now, as a bunch of 18-year-olds are worrying about what to do with the rest of their lives, I urge them to take a deep breath. And wait. I urge parents to stop pushing. This is beyond the usual advice I give about gap years, which always assist maturity. Do not force the next generation onto a treadmill with no safety barriers, no assurance and no confidence in the future. Do not force them to attend institutions which do not have students' best interest at heart. Going to university in 2026 is a risk no-one should take. Universities are now places of chaotic cost-cutting and cruel managers whose sole interest is the bottom line. Entire disciplines are being cut, staff numbers slashed and there is an even greater than usual reliance on casual staff who are, appropriating Beyonce's poeticism, underpaid and overwhelmed. Loading I spoke to Graeme Turner, seasoned academic, researcher and author of Broken: Universities, Politics and the Public Good, who acknowledges the crisis in which higher education finds itself. Minutes into our conversation, he says: 'If the government wants to have a higher education system, it is going to have to face the fact that it will have to pay for it. It's the same problem they face with aged care and childcare. You can't prioritise essential services and turn them over to a market and assume it's going to work. History shows it doesn't.' History also shows we have a Labor federal minister for education, Jason Clare, who has broken promises, including the promise he would ditch the appalling scheme by which arts students would have to pay 50 grand for a degree. Yep, that one was a Coalition special – Job-ready Graduates, devised to ensure no-one ever did a degree about critical thinking ever again. That fee is still there a full three years after Labor was first elected. I live in hope the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, with Barney Glover, Larissa Behrendt and Mary O'Kane in its interim phase, will seize this moment to provide advice to Clare to stick to his guns. That would be a revelation to all of us. But Andrew Norton, professor of higher education policy at Monash University, now tells me he thinks it can only happen in 2027. The National Tertiary Education Union (I was a member for 15 years) tells me that more than 10,000 academics have been dumped since the end of 2020. That's thousands of people whose careers were destroyed by the commercialisation of higher education. And sure, never mind fancy-pants careers, the quality of the education those people were providing has deteriorated too. How collegiality in these institutions has survived is a bloody miracle.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
We didn't get that rate relief, but Australia remains the lucky country
The reason the Reserve Bank can be a bit more indulgent on its monetary policy in future is because the inflation monster has largely been tamed, and this has been achieved without any debilitating increase in unemployment. Loading So there is another tick. And while many economies are panicking about the effects of Donald Trump's imposition of tariffs and their rising inflationary impact, evidence suggests that Australia, perversely, will be a net beneficiary of this otherwise debilitating trade policy. Of course, the uncertainty of the ad hoc and rapidly changing and unpredictable imposition of US trade levies brings with it uncertainty for all countries including Australia, and raises the risk of slower global growth. But according to a report this week from the Productivity Commission, its modelling shows that if one excludes the impact of uncertainty, 'the proposed US tariff changes could have a small, positive effect on Australia's economy. The results suggest that cheaper imports from the rest of the world, and an outflow of productive capital from the US and highly 'tariffed' economies, would slightly increase Australian production.' It was only a few months back that headlines screamed of the damage that would be wrought by tariffs on our steel and aluminium. These fears were, of course, overblown given our exports of these products account for less than a combined $1 billion a year. Rather, the Productivity Commission found that US 'Liberation Day' tariffs and tariffs on aluminium, steel and automobiles and parts could lead to an increase in Australian real GDP of 0.37 per cent. It says that the impact of Trump's tariffs would be negative on Australia if our government sought to impose retaliatory tariffs, but there is no suggestion that the Albanese government would do so. Thus, by several measures Australia is sitting in a sweet spot relative to many – if not most – other countries. Loading The largest shadow on the horizon is the potential fall in demand from China for Australian iron ore and the associated decline in its price. This would play poorly for Australia's sovereign balance sheet, putting pressure on the budget deficit. Based on an expected rate cut next month of 25 basis points to 3.6 per cent, a $600,000 mortgage would cost $100 a month less and take to $300 the monthly savings since the Reserve Bank started easing monetary policy in February. And while the US market was rattled and fell by almost 1 per cent on Monday night about the prospects of large tariffs being placed on Japan and South Korea, the extension of a deadline to August 1, 2025, suggests a better trade agreement over the next couple of weeks.
