🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and families are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a increasing number of nations are exploring similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that smartphones and apps are "robbing our kids' innocence". Legislation may be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to enact a bill increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged families to prevent their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. Even though it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid first step," said a leading parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong evidence".

Earlier, support gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to investigate the matter.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. One foundation established by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering disturbing platform posts argues that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," stated a leading peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, legislation is primarily happening at the regional level amid national gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law capping minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted bills requiring parental consent for minors to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various individuals to copy the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies take a more measured stance. Unicef has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this international discussion unfolds, the policies of Australia and several other countries show that governments globally are no longer willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.