🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are watching intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

Across Europe, a rising number of nations are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's youth". A law may be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an similar ban could be "a potential tools on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on parliament to enact a proposal increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised families to prevent their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a useful foundation," said the MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong data".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, legislation is largely occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with additional time needing adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures demanding adult authorization for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from various individuals to copy this example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Outside of these regions, additional states are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies strike a more nuanced tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization notes that social networks can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve user protection.

Even as this global debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that states internationally are less and less willing to delay for the industry to self-regulate.