🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

In Europe, a rising number of nations are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our kids' youth". The policy may be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to approve a law lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a symbolic motion supporting a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is given. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a solid foundation," said a leading European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for minors," said a prominent peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, action is primarily unfolding at the regional level amid federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra time dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from certain figures to copy this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Apart from these regions, additional states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international debate continues, the steps of Australia and others indicate that governments internationally are increasingly content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.