YouTube said it will comply with Australia’s teen social media ban, confirming it will lock out users under the age of sixteen from signed in accounts within days.
The move marks a major shift for one of the world’s largest video platforms and ends weeks of uncertainty over how the company would respond to the new law, which regulators have described as a global first.
In a statement, the company called the decision a “disappointing update” and warned the ban would make the platform less safe for young users. The teen social media ban is expected to begin taking effect December 10.
Australia passed the law earlier this year, prohibiting major digital platforms from allowing under sixteen users to hold accounts, with financial penalties reaching nearly A$50 million for violations.
The government said the measure was driven by mounting evidence that social media platforms are not doing enough to protect children from harmful or age inappropriate content.
Initially, YouTube was exempted due to its educational value, but the government reversed course and added the platform to the enforcement list. Google, which owns YouTube, had said it was seeking legal advice on how to respond.
“YouTube must now follow the same expectations that apply to every other platform,” Communications Minister Anika Wells said in Canberra. “This is about safety. It is not about punishing companies.”
The teen social media ban places YouTube alongside other major platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat, which previously confirmed they would comply with the restrictions. Only X and Reddit have yet to publicly commit.
Digital safety experts said YouTube’s resistance highlighted the ongoing debate over whether bans or age restrictions meaningfully protect children. Critics have said the teen social media ban may simply push younger users to less regulated corners of the internet.
Dr. Eleanor Moss, a cybersecurity researcher at the University of Sydney, said the policy could create unintended consequences.
“When platforms remove parental controls because children can no longer sign in, caregivers lose visibility,” she said. “YouTube is correct that monitoring becomes harder.
But that doesn’t mean regulation shouldn’t happen it means enforcement must be paired with broader digital education.”
Others argue that the increased pressure on global platforms may force them to rethink how they verify user ages, a longstanding problem in online safety policy.
“The teen social media ban highlights something regulators worldwide are grappling with: age verification,” said Jacob Turner, a digital law consultant based in Melbourne.
“The question is not whether platforms must comply, but how. Without clear verification processes, enforcement risks being symbolic rather than effective.”
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has identified YouTube as the platform where children most frequently report exposure to harmful content.
More than one third of Australians aged ten to fifteen said they encountered inappropriate or dangerous material on the platform, according to the regulator’s recent findings.
The teen social media ban impacts approximately 325,000 Australian users aged thirteen to fifteen on YouTube. Snapchat has the largest number of underage account holders at 440,000, followed by Instagram with 350,000.
Under the new rules, YouTube will automatically sign out under sixteen users from December 10. Young viewers can still watch videos without signing in, but they will lose the ability to subscribe, like, comment or upload content.
The company did not specify how it plans to verify a user’s age. Industry analysts said platforms have historically relied on self reported information, but that model may soon face pressure to change.
The announcement prompted mixed reactions among Australian families, teachers and teen content creators.
Sarah Langford, a Brisbane parent of a fourteen year old, said she supported the teen social media ban but questioned its roll out.
“My daughter mostly uses YouTube for homework and tutorials,” she said. “If she’s logged out, she loses her recommendations and her school channels. I want her to be safe, but the tools I rely on also disappear.”
Teen creators expressed confusion about their future on the platform. Fifteen year old Perth based gaming creator Michael “MicXPlayz” Young said he feared losing the community he built over three years. “I follow the rules, I don’t post anything inappropriate,” he said. “But now I can’t even log in to my own channel.”
Educators said the change could disrupt classroom routines. “We integrate YouTube heavily into curriculum planning, especially in science and history,” said Kate Donnelly, a high school teacher in Adelaide.
“The teen social media ban will require teachers to rethink lesson formats, especially if students can’t save playlists or comment on discussion threads.”
Regulators worldwide are closely watching Australia’s approach, and analysts expect the teen social media ban to influence global conversations about underage internet use.
Several European countries have floated similar proposals, while US lawmakers continue debating age verification and child protection legislation.
Minister Wells said additional platforms may be added to the enforcement list as trends shift. “The tech industry is dynamic,” she said. “When teenagers migrate to new apps, we need to ensure the rules follow them.”
Experts said the next challenge will be determining whether the ban genuinely reduces exposure to harmful content or whether it simply reshapes how young people access digital spaces.
“YouTube’s compliance will be a test case,” Dr. Moss said. “If the platform can demonstrate measurable improvements in safety, other governments may follow Australia’s lead.”
YouTube’s agreement to comply with Australia’s teen social media ban signals a turning point in the country’s online safety framework and places new pressure on global platforms to rethink how underage users interact with digital services.
Whether the ban ultimately improves child safety or complicates parental oversight remains uncertain, but the decision sets a precedent that may shape global regulatory policy for years to come.
