🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of nations are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' youth". The policy is expected to be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked lawmakers to pass a bill raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian driving the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in robust research".

Last year, support gathered behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the administration vowed to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a young person who was lost after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to build products and services that are appropriate and suitable for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, legislation is mostly occurring at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various politicians to mimic Australia's example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond the West, other nations are also exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, international agencies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The agency notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide debate continues, the steps of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that states internationally are no longer content to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.