🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our children's youth". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban could be "a potential measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked the legislature to pass a bill lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the step does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," commented a leading European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "based on conclusive research".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with additional time needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted laws requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various figures to mimic the Australian path, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond the West, additional countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies strike a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

Even as this international discussion continues, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that governments globally are no longer willing to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.