🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are watching intently to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that smartphones and apps are "robbing our children's innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has called on the legislature to pass a proposal raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a useful starting point," commented one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "supported by robust research".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the government vowed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a teenager who took her own life after viewing harmful online content argues that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build tools that are safe and suitable for young users," stated a influential peer.

America: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, legislation is mostly occurring at the local level amid country-wide inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use needing adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted laws mandating adult authorization for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain individuals to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of these regions, additional countries are also considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, international bodies strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even backfire". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve user protection.

While this global discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and others show that governments internationally are no longer content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.