Labor's YouTube ban would face backlash from parents as overwhelming majority say it helps kids learn
It comes after a growing group of lawmakers expressed frustration that the government backflipped on its previous exemption for YouTube in the under-16 social media ban laws.
Labor has considered breaking its promise and dragging YouTube into the ban after being lobbied by Chinese-owned platform TikTok.
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has also pressured Labor to break its pledge and ban the video sharing platform.
YouTube has since released new research by Oxford Economics which found 72 per cent of parents think the video sharing platform 'helps their children learn'.
Head of YouTube Australia Ed Miles said families took advantage of sophisticated parental controls and safety features to make the platform appropriate for learning.
'This new research from Oxford Economics demonstrates that Australian parents not only trust YouTube as a valuable learning resource, but also feel confident in guiding their children to use YouTube responsibly,' he said.
'This reflects parents' active involvement and their comfort in navigating YouTube alongside their children, using our safety features and parental controls.'
The research also found: 72 per cent of parents who use YouTube agree that YouTube (or YouTube Kids) helps their children learn.
79 per cent of parents who use YouTube agree that YouTube (or YouTube Kids) provides quality content for their children's learning and/or entertainment.
74 per cent of parents who use YouTube feel confident in their ability to guide their child on how to use YouTube (or YouTube Kids) responsibly.
The figures come after SkyNews.com.au revealed Ms Inman Grant misled Labor by suggesting YouTube was an algorithmically dangerous platform, falsely suggesting her comments were based on evidence.
"I don't make determinations or write recommendations to the minister based on whether I keep the public onside. I follow the evidence," she said, at the National Press Club in June.
"My main concern with these platforms is that harms are happening, but I talked about the pervasive design features.
"YouTube has mastered those. Opaque algorithms driving users down rabbit holes they're powerless to fight against."
Both Labor and eSafety refused to share this research until SkyNews.com.au lodged a Freedom of Information request.
Once SkyNews.com.au obtained the research it was clear the findings had been misrepresented.
In fact, it found that YouTube was one of the safest platforms for key risk concerns such as grooming, sexual harassment and bullying.
Children are more likely to be bullied via text messages than on YouTube.
The percentage of teenagers who reported being groomed on YouTube was three per cent, the same percentage as teenagers who reported grooming via text messages.
On Snapchat the figure was seven times higher at 23 per cent. On Instagram it was five times higher at 17 per cent.
There was no recommendation from Ms Inman Grant to ban text messages for teenagers.
Users need to be at least 13-years-old to create a YouTube account, meaning eSafety's proposed ban would only impact teenagers.
Sky News Digital Editor Jack Houghton, host of The Media Show, told his audience the survey was a "flawed" way to research the issue as it was based on the perceptions of young children who were being asked to self-identify 'harmful content'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
7 hours ago
- ABC News
Advance used unblurred footage of minors taken from education organisations without consent in new ad
Conservative lobby group Advance is under fire for repurposing footage of identifiable children without obtaining consent in a new ad attacking Welcome to Country ceremonies. When contacted by ABC NEWS Verify, many of the schools, child education centres, and organisations that had videos taken for use in the ad, said permission was not granted to use the footage, and they want the ad taken down. Advance started advertising with the ad, titled "Welcome To Your Own Country", on June 15 on Meta platforms. It uploaded the video on Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube — where, combined, it has been viewed more than 230,000 times. The ad shows minors taking part in Acknowledgement of Country activities at education facilities — with some of the children clearly identifiable. A face blur has only been used on some of the children. Some adult educators can also be identified. ABC NEWS Verify has chosen not to name any of the education facilities involved. Below are stills of the ad, but the images have been blurred, so children and adults can't be identified. ABC NEWS Verify has analysed the video and, using basic open-source techniques, was able to identify footage taken from the public social media accounts of four childcare and/or early learning centres, one playgroup organisation, two primary schools, and one prep to year 12 school. Footage featuring children filmed by not-for-profit group Reconciliation Australia was also used — as well as a clip featuring children from ABC programming. ABC NEWS Verify contacted the above organisations to ask if permission had been sought by Advance to use the footage in its ad. All but one replied by deadline confirming permission had not been sought. "The ad has been sourced from material publicly available on the internet," a spokesperson for Advance said. Some of the schools referred the inquiry to their respective education departments. "No permission has been granted by the ACT Education Directorate [or the primary school] for the use of this video. No consent has been granted by the parents of the children in the video for it to be used in this way," one said. "We object to footage of our students being used in this way, even more so without their knowledge and without the consent of their parents," it said. The Queensland Education Department said neither it, nor the school featured in the ad, were approached for permission to use the video. "The department is currently supporting the school to report the unauthorised use of footage to YouTube," it said. Reconciliation Australia also provided a statement. "Advance has not sought our permission to use the images contained in their ad," it said. "Written release forms were signed by all parents and guardians giving permission for Reconciliation Australia to use images of the children featured in the original video. "We are very concerned that Advance appears to have used images of minors with no attempt to de-identify many of the children nor to acquire consent from their parents or guardians, and without permission from Reconciliation Australia," it said. At least seven adult educators feature in the video — some have their faces blurred, but a number do not. A staff member from a playgroup organisation is prominently featured at the start of the ad. That organisation's chief executive told ABC NEWS Verify it had lodged an official complaint with YouTube and was seeking advice from the eSafety Commissioner on what to do if the video isn't removed. "I am deeply concerned to learn that footage originating from our official YouTube channel has been used without our consent in a political advertising campaign," they said. "We unequivocally condemn Advance Australia's unauthorised use of [the] material." It is understood the ABC was also unaware of its footage being used in the ad. ABC NEWS Verify contacted Advance and informed them that several organisations had said they would like their footage removed from the ad. In response, Advance said that it had not received any complaints. "We have not been contacted by any individual or organisations with the concerns you refer to in your questions," it said. "In fact, the response to the ad has been overwhelmingly positive." Technology and privacy legal expert James Patto from Scildan Legal said "it's at least arguable" that Advance has breached the Privacy Act in repurposing the footage. But he said it depends on whether the footage is considered "personal information" or "sensitive information" under the act. "If it's personal information — say the children are identifiable but there's no sensitive characteristics — then Advance Australia wouldn't necessarily need consent to collect it," he told ABC NEWS Verify. "But that doesn't mean they're off the hook. "They'd also need to notify individuals, unless that wasn't reasonably practicable. "It's important to remember that just because something's online doesn't mean it's fair game under privacy law." He said it's a different story if the footage is determined to be "sensitive information". "If the footage includes sensitive information, like racial or ethnic origin or biometric features, then consent is required to collect and use it," Mr Patto said. "That consent has to be specific to Advance and for the political purpose. Consent given to a school or film crew wouldn't likely cut it. "I think it's at least arguable that some of the footage could reveal sensitive information, like race and ethnic origin," he said. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner is the country's privacy regulator. It was contacted but failed to respond directly to questions concerning the ad.
Sydney Morning Herald
7 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The wealthy have been shielded from Britain's big problem
London: Fury swept across Britain's social media five days ago when residents of a wealthy part of London heard of government plans to move hundreds of asylum seekers into a hotel in their neighbourhood. Within hours, activists were posting videos from outside the hotel to call on politicians to send the outsiders away. The hotel in Canary Wharf, where luxury apartments tower over old docklands, was soon surrounded by protesters and police – turning it into the latest flashpoint in Britain's ferocious argument about refugees and migration. 'I can now confirm that the Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf has been handed over for use by asylum seekers and refugees,' posted Lee Nallalingham, a resident of Tower Hamlets, the council area that includes Canary Wharf, in London's east. 'That hotel is a five-minute walk from my daughter's nursery. It's surrounded by other nurseries and primary schools. And yet nobody asked local parents what we thought. Why are they being placed in one of the most expensive areas of London, next to schools, while locals can't get housing, safety, or basic services? 'Where's the consultation? Where's the protection for local families? Once again – no answers. Just secrecy and silence.' There was just one problem. Nallalingham wrongly asserted that people were being moved to Canary Wharf from an asylum seeker hotel in the town of Epping Forest, the scene of riots on Sunday night when protesters hurled flares, eggs and rocks at police. This was inflammatory because of the fury over the hotel in Epping, just outside London. But it was not true. Nallalingham was not caught up in the details. He is the chairman of the Reform UK branch in the Tower Hamlets area and was spreading the word for a purpose. Reform UK, the party led by right-wing politician Nigel Farage, is making big gains by tapping into grievances over the economy, gender politics, migration and refugees. So the outrage over asylum hotels is turning into another powerful campaign for Farage and Reform – and a disaster for Labour Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who once promised to shut them down. The Australian parallels are inescapable when Farage uses a simple rallying cry – 'stop the boats' – to build support. Another Reform UK politician, Lee Anderson, stood outside the Canary Wharf hotel to do a video for the X social media site about the imminent arrival of asylum seekers. Farage reposted this to his 2.2 million followers. The message helped to foment a street protest within hours. So what was really happening? Yes, the hotel was being prepared to house asylum seekers. No, they were not coming from Epping Forest. The British department charged with border security, the Home Office, made it clear there were no asylum seekers actually in the Canary Wharf hotel while the protesters stood outside. But it confirmed it had reserved more than 400 beds at the hotel to prepare for further asylum seeker arrivals in the weeks ahead. And the deeper truth? Britain is struggling with the weekly arrival of people on inflatable boats who cross the English Channel in the hope of gaining refugee status and finding work in a wealthy country. There were 60 people last Sunday, for instance, and 132 on Wednesday. On some days, there are none. Over the first six months of this year there were 19,982, according to a tally by Reuters based on public data. That was a 50 per cent increase from the same period last year. Starmer blames the previous government for the problem – with good cause, given the Conservatives ruled from 2010 to 2024 without stopping the boats. But Starmer has been in power for a full year. There are no signs that his policies are slowing the arrivals. The wealthy have been mostly shielded from this reality, especially in the finer neighbourhoods of London. Those on the lower rungs of the British class structure, however, have seen it up close when the asylum seekers are housed in their communities. With no end to the arrivals, more hotels are set up – and wealthier neighbourhoods like Canary Wharf take notice. At the same time, the community depends on migrants for essential services: cleaning the London Underground, staffing the supermarket, delivering food, serving at the takeaway. Citizens turn against migrants at the very moment they seem to rely on them more than ever. Inflammatory rhetoric fuels the discontent. Laila Cunningham, a Reform UK councillor on Westminster City Council in the heart of London, berated Labour and the Tories on Wednesday for losing control of the border. 'The Tories let in 6.5 million people over 14 years,' she said. The result, she added: 'Waves of unvetted young men, many of whom do not share our values and show no respect for British women.' Cunningham appeared to be exaggerating. The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has tracked the annual intake, based on public data, and its chart shows net migration of about 5 million from June 2012 to June 2024. Even so, the inflow has been running ahead of what the community wants. Public polling highlights the concern. The Migration Observatory reported results from 2023 showing that 52 per cent of British adults want migration to be reduced, while 14 per cent want it increased. Another 22 per cent want it to stay the same, while the remainder were undecided. The concern is not new because objections to migration helped shape the referendum in favour of Brexit. What has changed is the sense of urgency some voters feel about the challenge. In June 2016, when the voting public chose Brexit, 48 per cent of respondents said migration was an important issue. It fell away for years in public polling, but now it's back. It climbed to 38 per cent last October. Starmer is feeling the pressure to find a fix. 'We will stop at nothing to tackle illegal migration,' he said on Wednesday. In fact, there is a shortage of ideas to discourage the arrivals. Australia sent asylum seekers to remote islands and turned boats around in the Indian Ocean. The UK has not copied the Australian approach in the narrow confines of the English Channel, so it has to devise its own solution. The asylum hotels are part of a broader 'dispersal' policy for asylum seekers to spread them across the country. There were 38,000 asylum seekers in hotels at the end of last year, with another 65,000 in 'dispersal' housing such as private flats or hostels run by companies for the government. This is very different to the Australian policy, with so much attention on Manus Island and Nauru. In Britain, the experience is intensely local. The Epping Forest riots took place after the community reacted to an incident between an asylum seeker and a local girl. The man, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, from Ethiopia, was charged with three counts of sexual assault, one count of inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity and one count of harassment without violence. He denied all the offences when he appeared in court on July 10. Another case led to a conviction five days ago. Moffat Konofilia, 48, an asylum seeker from Solomon Islands, approached a girl, 17, on the beach at Weymouth in southern England in December 2023. A magistrate found him guilty of one count of sexual assault. When these cases make headlines, the community reacts. And Farage can turn that reaction into a mushroom cloud. Starmer and his ministers are trying to find new ways to slow the arrivals. They have a deal with French President Emmanuel Macron to return some people to France. They have announced sanctions on those in the asylum seeker trade. Individuals face financial sanctions, and the Chinese company that advertises its inflatable boats to people smugglers will be banned from doing business in the UK. Loading The riots over the past week have put a public face on the immense strain on Britain. It is an angry face, sometimes covered in a balaclava, unleashing rage at those in authority. The rioters do not speak for Britain because the data shows that many people want mercy shown to those who cross the Channel. But the public mood has turned against welcoming asylum seekers. Times are tough for many communities, and voters have reason to feel aggrieved. Every asylum seeker arrival can add to the sense that the system is broken. Every crime can add to the pressure. Even a tweet might set off a riot.
The Age
7 hours ago
- The Age
The wealthy have been shielded from Britain's big problem
London: Fury swept across Britain's social media five days ago when residents of a wealthy part of London heard of government plans to move hundreds of asylum seekers into a hotel in their neighbourhood. Within hours, activists were posting videos from outside the hotel to call on politicians to send the outsiders away. The hotel in Canary Wharf, where luxury apartments tower over old docklands, was soon surrounded by protesters and police – turning it into the latest flashpoint in Britain's ferocious argument about refugees and migration. 'I can now confirm that the Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf has been handed over for use by asylum seekers and refugees,' posted Lee Nallalingham, a resident of Tower Hamlets, the council area that includes Canary Wharf, in London's east. 'That hotel is a five-minute walk from my daughter's nursery. It's surrounded by other nurseries and primary schools. And yet nobody asked local parents what we thought. Why are they being placed in one of the most expensive areas of London, next to schools, while locals can't get housing, safety, or basic services? 'Where's the consultation? Where's the protection for local families? Once again – no answers. Just secrecy and silence.' There was just one problem. Nallalingham wrongly asserted that people were being moved to Canary Wharf from an asylum seeker hotel in the town of Epping Forest, the scene of riots on Sunday night when protesters hurled flares, eggs and rocks at police. This was inflammatory because of the fury over the hotel in Epping, just outside London. But it was not true. Nallalingham was not caught up in the details. He is the chairman of the Reform UK branch in the Tower Hamlets area and was spreading the word for a purpose. Reform UK, the party led by right-wing politician Nigel Farage, is making big gains by tapping into grievances over the economy, gender politics, migration and refugees. So the outrage over asylum hotels is turning into another powerful campaign for Farage and Reform – and a disaster for Labour Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who once promised to shut them down. The Australian parallels are inescapable when Farage uses a simple rallying cry – 'stop the boats' – to build support. Another Reform UK politician, Lee Anderson, stood outside the Canary Wharf hotel to do a video for the X social media site about the imminent arrival of asylum seekers. Farage reposted this to his 2.2 million followers. The message helped to foment a street protest within hours. So what was really happening? Yes, the hotel was being prepared to house asylum seekers. No, they were not coming from Epping Forest. The British department charged with border security, the Home Office, made it clear there were no asylum seekers actually in the Canary Wharf hotel while the protesters stood outside. But it confirmed it had reserved more than 400 beds at the hotel to prepare for further asylum seeker arrivals in the weeks ahead. And the deeper truth? Britain is struggling with the weekly arrival of people on inflatable boats who cross the English Channel in the hope of gaining refugee status and finding work in a wealthy country. There were 60 people last Sunday, for instance, and 132 on Wednesday. On some days, there are none. Over the first six months of this year there were 19,982, according to a tally by Reuters based on public data. That was a 50 per cent increase from the same period last year. Starmer blames the previous government for the problem – with good cause, given the Conservatives ruled from 2010 to 2024 without stopping the boats. But Starmer has been in power for a full year. There are no signs that his policies are slowing the arrivals. The wealthy have been mostly shielded from this reality, especially in the finer neighbourhoods of London. Those on the lower rungs of the British class structure, however, have seen it up close when the asylum seekers are housed in their communities. With no end to the arrivals, more hotels are set up – and wealthier neighbourhoods like Canary Wharf take notice. At the same time, the community depends on migrants for essential services: cleaning the London Underground, staffing the supermarket, delivering food, serving at the takeaway. Citizens turn against migrants at the very moment they seem to rely on them more than ever. Inflammatory rhetoric fuels the discontent. Laila Cunningham, a Reform UK councillor on Westminster City Council in the heart of London, berated Labour and the Tories on Wednesday for losing control of the border. 'The Tories let in 6.5 million people over 14 years,' she said. The result, she added: 'Waves of unvetted young men, many of whom do not share our values and show no respect for British women.' Cunningham appeared to be exaggerating. The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has tracked the annual intake, based on public data, and its chart shows net migration of about 5 million from June 2012 to June 2024. Even so, the inflow has been running ahead of what the community wants. Public polling highlights the concern. The Migration Observatory reported results from 2023 showing that 52 per cent of British adults want migration to be reduced, while 14 per cent want it increased. Another 22 per cent want it to stay the same, while the remainder were undecided. The concern is not new because objections to migration helped shape the referendum in favour of Brexit. What has changed is the sense of urgency some voters feel about the challenge. In June 2016, when the voting public chose Brexit, 48 per cent of respondents said migration was an important issue. It fell away for years in public polling, but now it's back. It climbed to 38 per cent last October. Starmer is feeling the pressure to find a fix. 'We will stop at nothing to tackle illegal migration,' he said on Wednesday. In fact, there is a shortage of ideas to discourage the arrivals. Australia sent asylum seekers to remote islands and turned boats around in the Indian Ocean. The UK has not copied the Australian approach in the narrow confines of the English Channel, so it has to devise its own solution. The asylum hotels are part of a broader 'dispersal' policy for asylum seekers to spread them across the country. There were 38,000 asylum seekers in hotels at the end of last year, with another 65,000 in 'dispersal' housing such as private flats or hostels run by companies for the government. This is very different to the Australian policy, with so much attention on Manus Island and Nauru. In Britain, the experience is intensely local. The Epping Forest riots took place after the community reacted to an incident between an asylum seeker and a local girl. The man, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, from Ethiopia, was charged with three counts of sexual assault, one count of inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity and one count of harassment without violence. He denied all the offences when he appeared in court on July 10. Another case led to a conviction five days ago. Moffat Konofilia, 48, an asylum seeker from Solomon Islands, approached a girl, 17, on the beach at Weymouth in southern England in December 2023. A magistrate found him guilty of one count of sexual assault. When these cases make headlines, the community reacts. And Farage can turn that reaction into a mushroom cloud. Starmer and his ministers are trying to find new ways to slow the arrivals. They have a deal with French President Emmanuel Macron to return some people to France. They have announced sanctions on those in the asylum seeker trade. Individuals face financial sanctions, and the Chinese company that advertises its inflatable boats to people smugglers will be banned from doing business in the UK. Loading The riots over the past week have put a public face on the immense strain on Britain. It is an angry face, sometimes covered in a balaclava, unleashing rage at those in authority. The rioters do not speak for Britain because the data shows that many people want mercy shown to those who cross the Channel. But the public mood has turned against welcoming asylum seekers. Times are tough for many communities, and voters have reason to feel aggrieved. Every asylum seeker arrival can add to the sense that the system is broken. Every crime can add to the pressure. Even a tweet might set off a riot.
