AU Engine

Source: NGARKAT HIGHWAY, NGARKAT (Grass Fire)

The Albanese Labor Government is backing Australian families, parents and kids by announcing today YouTube will be included in its world-leading under-16 social media laws.

Delaying access to social media, including YouTube, until the age of 16 will protect young Australians at a critical stage of their development, giving them three more years to build real world connections and online resilience.

Following extensive consultation and advice, age-restricted social media platforms will face fines of up to $49.5 million for failing to take responsible steps to prevent underage account holders onto their services.

Age-restricted social media platforms will include Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X and YouTube, amongst other platforms.

Informed by advice from the eSafety Commissioner, the Online Safety (Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms) Rules 2025 tabled today specify which types of online services will not be captured by the social media legislation, including online gaming, messaging apps, health and education services.

These types of online services have been excluded from the new minimum age obligations because they pose fewer social media harms to under 16s, or are regulated under different laws.

From 10 December 2025, all services that meet the definition of ‘age-restricted social media platform’ in the Act, and are not excluded in the rules, will be subject to the social media minimum age law.

Age restricted social media accounts are defined as services that allow users to interact and post material.

The Government is proud to be on the side of families.

Quotes attributable to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese

“Our Government is making it clear – we stand on the side of families.

“Social media has a social responsibility and there is no doubt that Australian kids are being negatively impacted by online platforms so I’m calling time on it.

“Social media is doing social harm to our children, and I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs.”

Quotes attributable to Minister for Communications Anika Wells

“The Albanese Government is giving kids a reprieve from the persuasive and pervasive pull of social media while giving parents peace of mind.

“We want kids to know who they are before platforms assume who they are.

“There is no one perfect solution when it comes to keeping young Australians safer online – but the social media minimum age will make a significantly positive difference to their wellbeing.

“The rules are not a set and forget, they are a set and support.

“There are heavy penalties for companies who fail to take reasonable steps to prevent underage account holders onto their services of up to $49.5 million.

“There’s a place for social media, but there’s not a place for predatory algorithms targeting children.”

Source: Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Visitors to Ulverstone Art Gallery in Tasmania will get a unique glimpse into the magic of the sculpture garden at the National Gallery of Australia thanks to the Albanese Labor Government’s Sharing the National Collection program.

Two works are heading south to the regional gallery, including a bronze study of the large bronze sculpture by Auguste Rodin Maquette for The burghers of Calais, 1884 cast 1973 and Rick Amor’s preparatory work Study for ‘The dog’, 1994.

Both works are studies by the artists for sculptures that are currently on display in the National Gallery Sculpture Garden.

Nestled in Tasmania’s northwest coast, Ulverstone Art Gallery is housed within the HIVE cultural precinct and will craft an integrated program around both these works.

Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke, said this loan was a unique opportunity for audiences to connect with well-known works in a different way.

“Often with sculpture we see the finished bronzed product, but these studies are interesting because the viewer gets to see the artists’ hands at the inception of the work.

“At any point 98 per cent of the national collection is held in storage. This loan is an example of just some of the varied works that the program makes available for galleries to show to local audiences.”

Member for Braddon Anne Urquhart said this loan is a fantastic opportunity for the Braddon Community to receive a glimpse into the National Gallery of Australia’s collection.

“Ulverstone is a thriving cultural community. Sharing the National Collection is a fantastic program which enables local communities like the Central Coast to gain an insight into the National Gallery Collection.”

Central Coast Council Mayor, Cheryl Fuller said the loan was a win for the region.

“HIVE was created to celebrate community and culture in our region — a place where everyone can come together to learn, connect, and be inspired. Art is made to be seen — to challenge us and spark new ideas.

“We are very proud to be able to showcase these works through the Sharing the National Collection program, bringing great art to all Australians, wherever they live. This is a rare opportunity to experience part of the national collection right here in Ulverstone, and we encourage everyone to come and enjoy it.”

Director of the National Gallery, Dr Nick Mitzevich, said the program was continuing to offer unique cultural experiences across Australia.

“The Sharing the National Collection program creates opportunities for regional galleries to use works from the national collection to engage with their audiences in new ways.

“From Rick Amor to Auguste Rodin, the National Gallery is excited to partner with Ulverstone Art Gallery to bring bronze works by significant artists to a regional Tasmanian community.”

Sharing the National Collection is part of Revive, Australia’s national cultural policy. The program has provided $11.8m over four years to fund the costs of transporting, installing and insuring works in the national art collection so that they can be seen right across the country. 

Regional and suburban galleries can register their interest in the loan program here.

Images of the works can be found here.

Source: Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority

SARAH FERGUSON: Anika Wells is the Minister for Communications. She joined me from Parliament House. Anika Wells, welcome.

MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND SPORT ANIKA WELLS: Good to be with you.

FERGUSON: Now going first of all to the reversal on YouTube, your predecessor Michelle Rowland said in November that while YouTube functions like social media, it was exempted from the ban because it enables young people to get the education and health support they need. What changed?

WELLS: Fresh evidence from the eSafety Commissioner about research that she did with Australian children from December last year, so after those laws were legislated, that said 37 per cent of Australian kids, or almost four in 10, had suffered their most recent or most impactful online harm on YouTube. So, under those laws that Minister Rowland drafted, I had to ask the eSafety Commissioner for her advice about the draft rules, and I had to give that advice regard. So, her recommendation was that YouTube form part of the social media ban because that online harm, on balance, was more impactful than the benefits of health and education. 

And I’d also point out, Sarah, that kids will still be able to use YouTube Kids, and parents, teachers will still be able to use YouTube links in a logged out state to access health and educational videos on YouTube. This is about kids having their own logins.

FERGUSON: Let’s talk about the logins because, as you just said, it doesn’t stop young people from accessing YouTube without an account. So, what sort of content will a young person still be able to view on YouTube without an account?

WELLS: Well, YouTube says that you can’t view age-restricted content in a logged-out state. So, per YouTube’s own policies that run and you can see on their website now, if you are in a logged-out state you should not be able to see anything that is inappropriate for children. So, we take that, we accept that. But if that is not the case, then YouTube, it is their social responsibility as a social media platform to fix that.

FERGUSON: We’re talking here about trying to restrict content for young people, but isn’t the much bigger question, why are the social media companies putting this vile material on their platforms in the first place?

WELLS: It’s the question at stake, I agree with you, Sarah, but it is a question for the social media platforms. I mean, YouTube uploads 500 hours of content every 60 seconds, and if you could put all of that social media content in a library, it would be the world’s worst library. You would not allow your child to walk into it. But the internet is here. The internet is ubiquitous. And I said, it’s like trying to – you know, I’ve got little kids – we are all trying our best. Parents are trying their best but it is like trying to teach your kids to swim in an open ocean with rips and sharks rather than at the local council pool. We can’t control the ocean, but we can police the sharks and we’re going to have a crack at it.

FERGUSON: Let’s just talk about what YouTube says. They argue now that this ban on young people holding accounts will mean that those young people are no longer protected by the guardrails that they have put in place for young people, which includes trying to stop young people getting access to inappropriate material. Essentially, their argument is you’re making the situation more dangerous for young people by taking them out of that restricted area.

WELLS: Well, I have a couple of things to say to that. Firstly, YouTube Kids will continue to be able to be used by children, so why can’t these health or educational videos be viewed on YouTube Kids? And why can’t YouTube look at building out YouTube Kids to YouTube teens, for example, to use those safeguards that they’ve already developed and the eSafety Commissioner acknowledges they have developed in her advice to me, which we published. But if YouTube is prepared to admit that they are allowing dangerous or age-restricted content in an open manner against their own policies, then that is a question YouTube should answer.

FERGUSON: Last year, the Government was pursuing a digital duty of care. That was a much bigger project that put the legal responsibility onto the tech companies to prevent harmful content on their platforms. Have you given up on that? 

WELLS: No, we remain absolutely committed to that plan. You know, it was the publicly committed recommendation that we committed to as a Government in the last term of that online safety review, and I’m looking forward to doing more work on it. I’m still a new minister. I’m getting my feet under the desk.

I think the digital duty of care is a really important way of us embedding in the Australian law that social media platforms have a social media responsibility. Obviously, in that act, industry codes are led by industry and, like you say, the onus is on them to do it. But I hope this opens up a conversation amongst Australians, and particularly Australian parents, about what that level is. What is the level of government intervention that is appropriate? What is the level for industry codes to regulate themselves? I hope we can all have that discussion, and I hope we can all do it, particularly on the road to 10 December.

FERGUSON: And just briefly, the language of the ban is that social media platforms will be required to take reasonable steps to prevent under-16’s from holding accounts. What does reasonable steps mean?

WELLS: The reasonable steps is suggested and worked through with the eSafety Commissioner. These platforms work with her every day on what this looks like. And, I mean, they’ve had eight months already. They have another four months. We made this law last year to give everybody 12 months to work through these elements. And obviously, this is going to look different for every platform. They’ve all got proprietary technology. They’re all rivals with each other. That’s why we can’t do this in a universal way. It’s going to look different for each platform. 

But, I mean, reasonable steps is a pretty common test under the law, and I think it comes down to common sense. And in this case, in particular, it comes down to whether the eSafety Commissioner is satisfied.

FERGUSON: And when will we know how age verification is going to work?

WELLS: So, we’re awaiting the final results of the age assurance trial. And when I get that, I will publish that as soon as possible so that everybody can have a look at it. And I think it’s an important step along the way. Plenty of platforms already have age assurance mechanisms that they use in their platforms. And then we’ve also stipulated as part of these reforms that platforms are going to have to offer people an alternative to uploading their own personal identification documents to the platform if they’re not happy. 

FERGUSON: So, just to conclude on age verification, you said there’s some time to go, but your expectation is that the social media companies will come up with mechanisms that will work, short of things like uploading personal documents?

WELLS: We’ve said they have to provide an alternative. Maybe that is an option, but you have to provide an alternative for Australians who aren’t comfortable doing that. But I would say, that social media platforms can target with deadly accuracy to all of us. They know who we are, they know what we do, they know who we’re friends with, they know when we hang out with them, they know what we click on and why and when, and they have a lot of data on us. They probably know our age already. They need to come up with ways to test that if they don’t. But, you know, if you’ve had a social media account, if you’ve been on Facebook since 2009, Facebook knows that you’re over 16.

FERGUSON: Online gaming platforms are exempt from the ban, but there’s plenty of research that shows that predators target very young, often very young, children on gaming platforms, using – well, making available sexual content via the avatars and via the voice functions in those games. Why are they not banned?

WELLS: Because they are subject to the National Classification Scheme and other laws in Australia, they’re nominated as exempt. But it is for, like I’ve said earlier today, these laws aren’t set and forget, they’re set and support. And if it is the case that we see or the eSafety Commissioner observes the practice of that after these laws come into place as needing attention, then we will absolutely have a look at it. 

FERGUSON: Anika Wells, thank you for joining us and for working through the bell system there in Parliament.

WELLS: Thank you. Sarah. Have a good evening.

Source: Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority

WIPPA: Very important day, actually, because the social media reform, as we’ve discussed, and you know that I’m part of 36 Months, which was a movement to campaign against changing the law that kids could join social media. And it was about becoming citizens of the social media platform. And that 36 Months represents the age which the law was at 13 and then obviously to 16 and that crucial time period. Due to the hospitalisation rates of teenagers suicide rates have gone up unfortunately we’ve had to step in and say hey I don’t think social media is the best place for young brains at that moment in time so come December 10, the reform will take place and these laws will come into play. 

FITZY: We’ve already had a conversation with our 11-year-old, which is interesting because, you know what, he does. He wants to start a Snapchat account. He wants to do this. So, you know, it’s great to get the ball rolling now, parents, to start saying to children, look, I understand what you would like, but in Australia we do have laws here and they kick in December unfortunately, you’ve got to wait until you’re 16 before you can do it. And you know what? Lenny understands. He understands straight away. I’m fully aware.

WIPPA: It does take a bit of explaining, but I think there’s a level of national pride that should exist as well with this because we’re saying as a Commonwealth, we’re saying to big tech that, hey, hey, we know what’s best for our kids and we’ll be the judge of that. So we’re putting kids and we’re putting families first over big tech. And as a nation, we’re saying we’re not going to put up with that. We’ve got a different idea about what the best interest is. The announcement today that has been made, and you’ll see it in the paper this morning, is from Anika Wells, our Communications Minister and also for sport. But she has now included YouTube, which the government has decided should also exist under this reform. So the Honourable Anika Wells MP joins us now in Canberra. Hello, Anika.  

COMMUNICATIONS AND SPORTS MINISTER ANIKA WELLS: Good morning. Hope you’re all well. 

WIPPA: We are well. This is obviously a big decision, Anika, to include YouTube. 

ANIKA WELLS: It is. YouTube will now be part of the social media ban and that makes Australia’s social media laws world-leading and we should all be really proud of that, particularly groups like 36 Months with more than 130,000 parents who did a lot of hard work to get the government to a place where we can declare that today.

FITZY: So, Anika, a lot of families will be freaking out here going, my gosh, well if this comes into play, my kids won’t be able to watch YouTube at all. But that’s not the case, is it?

WELLS: No, it’s not the case. And, you know, I had my parent’s friends asking me about this at a Triple J Hot 100 house party on the weekend. I understand people want to learn how this will affect their kids, but I think everybody agrees it’s too important for us not to have a crack at it. You’re exactly right. If kids need to look at YouTube because their teachers want them to look at number blocks or if you need to occupy your kids, YouTube Kids will still be available. There will still be ways for people to use social media responsibly as a family, but like you said, Wippa, it’s up to you to make those decisions as a family.

WIPPA: Minister Wells, what’s interesting I think with the reform, people feel like there’s going to be some sort of black curtain that’s going to be pulled across a lot of the social media platforms and therefore they won’t exist until you wake up on your 16th birthday and that curtain is gone. So especially for YouTube in particular, and YouTube consider themselves to be a search engine because there is so much great content on there. So I think it’s just important to spell out, as you have mentioned, that you can still use YouTube without logging in. You don’t need an account and to share your details to still use YouTube. That’s correct, isn’t it?

WELLS: That’s right. And also I think I’d want your listeners to know that we’ve got parents’ backs, we are looking after parents. The onus is on the platforms here. Come 10th of December, it is up to the social media platforms to deactivate accounts for people under 16. It’s up to platforms to not let under 16-year-olds open new accounts. It’s up to the platforms to make sure that when kids work out workarounds, because God bless them, they will. We know that they will. It’s up to the social media platforms to take reasonable steps to stop that from happening anymore. I think that is reasonable. They have a social responsibility in this country as a social media platform.

FITZY: So just to make sure for anyone listening out there, this is all it is, that kids from December 10 under the age of 16 won’t be able to start up their own YouTube account. So like Anika is saying, if you do get a link from school that the kids need to watch on YouTube but you can still use it the way that you do but your child under the age of 16 won’t be able to start a new YouTube account themselves.

WELLS: Yep, that’s exactly right. You’ve nailed it. So the onus is on the platforms here to have social responsibility and to make sure that there aren’t accounts for under 16-year-olds. Obviously, social media has a place, but persuasive and predatory algorithms do not, and that’s what we’re trying to stamp out here.

WIPPA: Do you know, Minister Wells, I think what’s the important point is to also realise people calling this a social media ban. It’s not a ban. We’re just delaying it for 36 months and we’re giving you that time back but, you know, you’ve got young kids as well and I think- I know we have an issue where 13-year-olds are going to go, oh my God, but I’m on Snapchat and all of this but we need to think beyond that as well and we need to think about the younger kids. I have a five-year-old and, the law change is the first thing and then the behaviour change is the next thing. So that’s why I think today is such an important step forward.

WELLS: I think that’s right. It’s delaying access to social media. We want kids to learn and work out who they are before these social media platforms assume who they are. We’re buying them 36 more months to build real-world connections and to build online resilience. I think that’s a really good thing. And it’s about the chilling effect because we know, like smoking, there’ll still be kids that want to smoke under 18 and they’ll find a way to do it. But it’s about the chilling effect. I just had this on the weekend. I’ve got four-year-old twins. I forgot to buckle in, to put one of the twins in into his car seat and I drove off and all three of them in the back seat started screaming like, “Mum, you have to put his seatbelt on! Mum, pull over!” They thought that the cops were going to appear out of nowhere and take us down. And, if they didn’t want to wear their seatbelt, they know it’s against the law and it has a chilling effect.

WIPPA: It’s never going to be perfect. Thank you so much for joining us with the important announcement today, Minister Wells.

WELLS: You’re welcome, have a great day.

Source: Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority

HOST KARL STEFANOVIC: YouTube will now be included in the Federal Government’s hotly debated social media ban for under-16s, but not without plenty of pushback from the online platform. For more, we’re joined by Communications Minister Anika Wells in Canberra. Anika, good morning to you. Nice to see you this morning.

Look, your government’s been all over the shop with YouTube. What took you so long to level the playing field?

MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND SPORT, ANIKA WELLS: Fresh evidence from the eSafety Commissioner which she gave to me in June, that said 37 per cent of kids had their most recent or most impactful online harm at the hands of YouTube. So they are joining the ban.

KARL STEFANOVIC: So they’ll still be able to access YouTube Kids, right, and YouTube in general, but through their parents’ account?

ANIKA WELLS: That’s right. I mean, YouTube does have educational features. I know my daughter’s learnt Numberblocks there. Teachers will still be able to send links home that you can use if you need to. They’ll be able to use their own account in the classroom. YouTube Kids still exists for when we do need our kids- there is a place for social media, obviously, but social media platforms have a social responsibility. And with a stat like four out of ten kids experiencing online harm, as the Minister for Communications, I had to act.

KARL STEFANOVIC: There’ll be- no doubt, but there’ll be absolute mayhem in every household if Harper can’t watch YouTube Kids in the morning, let me tell you. But under parental supervision, that’s going to be the responsibility of parents to police.

ANIKA WELLS: No, it’s not. This is very much a case of us looking after parents. Parents, we have your backs. This is the responsibility of the platform. So what does it look like? Come 10 December, it means that if your kid has a YouTube login or another social media platform login, the platform needs to deactivate it. And the platform needs to take reasonable steps to make sure that kids don’t activate new logins. And when they find their way around this, because we know that kids will, God bless them, the platforms take reasonable steps to mitigate that from happening and to correct errors.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Yeah, what does that look like? I mean, I’m not worried about between the ages of, say, 3 and 13 or 14. That’s done under their parents’ logins anyway, platforms and account. But that age group there between 13 and 16 are particularly savvy. How are you going to police that?

ANIKA WELLS: Look, these laws aren’t infallible, none are. But this is about the chilling effect. And there’s a study that asked kids who are 16, 17, 18, do they wish that they had not gotten on social media as early as 13? And they all said, yeah, they regret it. But when everybody’s on it, it’s a really isolating place if it’s not you. Whereas this is now a chilling effect. It’s against the law. Nobody’s allowed on it. Go out and play on the field. Go play some sport.

KARL STEFANOVIC: It’s a good thing. YouTube is galvanising Aussie creators, though, to respond. You worried about them?

ANIKA WELLS: YouTube did send the Wiggles to try and persuade me to their position.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Did they?

ANIKA WELLS: They did, they sent Big Wiggle. And obviously, like, my twins love The Wiggles…

KARL STEFANOVIC: You’re joking, right?

ANIKA WELLS: No. And that’s all right. I mean, YouTube has creators like The Wiggles. They have a right to exist. The Wiggles are a treasured Australian institution. But like I said to them, you’re arguing that my four-year-old twins’ right to have a YouTube login is more important than the fact that four out of ten their peers will experience online harm on YouTube, and they might be two of those four. And I just didn’t find that argument ultimately persuasive.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Let me just get this right. So, the Purple Wiggle, or whichever Wiggle, I don’t want to identify the Wiggles according to colours, but they’re Wiggles and they wear colours. Did they drive their big red car up to Parliament and lobby for YouTube? Did they drive their big red car up to Parliament and lobby for YouTube?

ANIKA WELLS: No, this was Big Wiggle. This was Wiggles Inc, the management around the Wiggles. But I would have been happy to receive any colour skivvy to my office. And I would also note that these are not set-and-forget laws, they’re set-and-support, and it’s up to YouTube and all the other social media platforms who are impacted by the ban to now work with the eSafety Commissioner around what this looks like for their particular platform until 10 December.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Alright, so that was a hot potato. And you passed on it…

ANIKA WELLS: [Talks over] I cherish it.

KARL STEFANOVIC: … You passed on it. Look, are you worried about legal action?

ANIKA WELLS: I mean, we have had threats come in, but, look, you know, I’ve got sharp elbows. This is too important for us not to have a crack. They are world-leading laws, and I know that we as the Albanese Government are very proud of that. This is important. Social media has a place. I have kids who use social media, but while social media has a place, persuasive and predatory algorithms do not, and that’s what we’re cracking down on.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Agree completely. Just finally, on the tariffs, some disturbing information coming out of the US. Donald Trump mentioned that it might be a blanket 20 per cent tariff now. Is that- do you think you’re going to get any kind of clarity before August 1 on whether or not Australia will get 10 or 20 per cent?

ANIKA WELLS: Yeah, look, we haven’t heard anything to that effect of the new percentage here. Obviously we will continue…

KARL STEFANOVIC: [Interrupts] Is that disturbing for you?

ANIKA WELLS: We will continue to argue robustly that these actions are not those of a friend, and whilst we have the lowest percentage at the moment in the world, these are an act of economic self-harm. They’re in no-one’s interests, and we’ll continue to put that point really strongly.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Worry that it could be 20 per cent?

ANIKA WELLS: I think we haven’t heard anything to that effect to give us fresh cause for alarm, I think. And we’ll continue to maintain our position that we have been consistent in all along.

KARL STEFANOVIC: Always good to talk to you, Anika. Well done on the YouTube. Thank you.

ANIKA WELLS: See you soon.

Source: Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority

HOST NATALIE BARR: In a major backflip by the Government, we’ve been reporting this all morning on Sunrise, YouTube is now included in Australia’s world first under-16 social media ban, with the laws due to take effect at the end of the year.

HOST MATT SHIRVINGTON: Yeah, the changes will mean platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and X, and now YouTube will have to verify that account users are aged 16 or over with hefty fines of almost $50 million for companies that fail to comply. Joining us now is Communications Minister Anika Wells live in Canberra. Great to have you with us. So many people wouldn’t consider YouTube to be a social media platform, so to speak. Why has it been added to the list?

MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND SPORT – ANIKA WELLS: Because the eSafety Commissioner has new evidence that 37 per cent of under-16s had their most recent or most impactful online harm at the hands of YouTube. And it has the same persuasive algorithms that other social media platforms that are already banned have. So with that new evidence in, I have decided to add them to the ban.

NATALIE BARR: But do you need a login? Can’t you just sort of go onto YouTube yourself?

ANIKA WELLS: Well, that’s exactly right, Nat. This social media ban is about under-16s not having their own accounts on social media. And there are educational videos on YouTube. Teachers use it in the classroom. Teachers will still be able to send home YouTube links for Numberblocks or what have you, and parents can facilitate kids watching that. And YouTube Kids will still exist for kids to use because social media has a place, I accept that, but persuasive and predatory algorithms do not. And this social media ban is about giving kids three more years or 36 months to work out who they are before social media platforms assume who they are.

MATT SHIRVINGTON: Are you concerned Google has threatened to sue the Government if YouTube was included in these laws? Let me just take you through a couple of states in the US at the moment who have passed similar laws to block younger people from using social media. Utah has been blocked in court because of proceedings. Ohio permanently blocked in federal court to enforce the laws. California temporarily blocked in the Ninth Circuit, pending an appeal. Are you concerned that the laws will pass, then Google will sue and you won’t be able to implement them? 

ANIKA WELLS: The laws have passed. They passed last year and we gave a 12-month introductory period for platforms to work with the eSafety Commissioner on what this looks like for them, for parents to prepare, so that we’re ready come 10 December. But YouTube’s legal threat suggested that we were breaching the Australian Constitution and under-16s’ implied right to freedom of political communication because of their right to comment on YouTube videos. But it’s that commenting on YouTube videos, it’s that endless scroll that is actually the very problem and isn’t the educational videos like Number blocks that has utility. So YouTube should be treated like every other social media platform, and therefore it is part of the ban.

NATALIE BARR: So if I’m a 14-year-old in my bedroom, I can go onto YouTube because there’s no restriction at the moment and the algorithm will send me adult stuff, won’t it? Because nothing is telling it that I’m a kid. So isn’t that bad because it’s sending me adult content?

ANIKA WELLS: Well, YouTube says that in a logged-out state, you can’t see age-restricted content, which means that in a logged-out state, you should not be seeing anything that is R18-plus, for example. So if YouTube is making the argument that it isn’t safe in a logged-out state, then that’s YouTube that needs to answer why that’s the case and make it safe.

NATALIE BARR: Or you’ll fine them $50 million?

ANIKA WELLS: For systemic breaches, yes we will.

NATALIE BARR: Okay, interesting.

MATT SHIRVINGTON: Anika, thanks for your time this morning, really appreciate it. And once it is implemented, we’ll get you back on to see how it’s working.

ANIKA WELLS: Looking forward to it.

MATT SHIRVINGTON: Thank you.

NATALIE BARR: Thank you.

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

The Northern Territory Police Force has suspended the search for a man missing near Alice Springs.

 NT Police have held serious concerns for the welfare of 26-year-old
Gach since he went missing in the afternoon of Monday July 28.

Extensive search efforts, coordinated by the NT Police Force’s Search
and Rescue Section (SRS) was suspended late this afternoon following a
fifth day of searching an area about 21km west of Alice Springs.

The search as rescue operation at its peak involved more than 50
personnel from NT Police, NT Emergency Services, NT Fire and Rescue
Service, and Parks and Wildlife NT.

The search was conducted by personnel on foot, on ATVs and flying
drones. The NT Police Dog Operations Unit, a Jet Ranger helicopter and
a Challenger jet aircraft, deployed by the Australian Maritime Safety
Authority, have also been involved in the search effort, which covered
more than 500km² of difficult terrain since it started on Tuesday.

Acting Sergeant Chris Grother said police had kept the family updated
throughout the search and that they are aware it has been suspended.

The matter has now been handed to the NT Police Southern Crime
Division for further investigation.

“I want to thank all the search teams who have done an excellent job
covering a huge area over the past 5 days but, unfortunately, it
hasn’t produced the result we hoped for,” Acting Sergeant Grother
said.

“We continue to urge anyone who may have seen Gach in the vicinity of
Larapinta Drive, Standley Chasm, or Simpsons Gap on the evening of
Monday 28 July or if they have any other information to contact police
on 131 444.”

Gach is described as being of Sudanese appearance, with dark skin, a
slim build, short curly hair, and approximately 6 feet tall. He was
last seen wearing cream tracksuit pants, a black t-shirt, a red/orange
puffer jacket, and dark-coloured shoes.

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Police seek witnesses to Huonville crash

Saturday, 2 August 2025 – 10:56 am.

Police are investigating a single-vehicle crash involving a white Ford Falcon utility near Huonville on Friday afternoon, which resulted in a young man being hospitalised.
Police and emergency services were called to the crash at the intersection of Huon Highway and Huon Link Road, about 3.55pm on Friday.
Preliminary investigations indicate the driver lost control travelling on Huon Link Road, with his vehicle crossing to the opposite side of the roundabout intersection before coming to rest under Armco railing.
The driver, a 20-year-old man, was extracted from the vehicle by State Emergency Service volunteers before being taken to Royal Hobart Hospital for treatment for non-life-threatening injuries.
Police believe the Armco railing in place prevented the vehicle from rolling over and going down the embankment.
Anyone who witnessed the crash or has dash cam footage, is asked to contact Huonville police on 131 444 or report anonymously to Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or at crimestopperstas.com.au

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Shots fired at Gagebrook house

Saturday, 2 August 2025 – 10:42 am.

Police are calling for information on an incident at Gagebrook overnight in which shots were fired at a house in Briar Crescent.
Initial investigations show a shotgun-style firearm was used to fire two shots at the residence about 2.10am on Saturday, with the shots causing damage to roof guttering and a window.
No one was injured, with the occupant of the house and neighbours calling police.
Police are asking anyone who may have CCTV or dash cam footage, or witnessed suspicious activity in the area around the time of the incident, to contact them on 131 444 or report anonymously to Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or www.crimestopperstas.com.au. Quote OR 781 479.

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Man charged with assault on police

Saturday, 2 August 2025 – 9:49 am.

A 32-year-old man will appear in out-of-session court in Launceston today (August 2) charged with multiple offences, including two separate charges of assaulting a police officer.Tasmania Police allege the man punched and bit two officers as he resisted arrest during an incident at a residential property in Kings Meadows on Friday night.The man is facing several charges including common assault, two counts of assaulting a police officer, resisting police and destroying property.The two officers did not receive serious injuries.