🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Trend

In Europe, a increasing chorus of states are considering similar restrictions.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". A law may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to enact a law lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is given. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a good starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization established by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after encountering harmful social media material argues that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and suitable for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, regulation is mostly occurring at the regional level amid country-wide gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a law capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring parental consent for minors to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some politicians to mimic Australia's path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Outside of the West, further nations are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, international organizations adopt a more measured stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The organization points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this international conversation evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others show that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.