🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a rising group of states are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that phones and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". Legislation may be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "an options in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised families to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory resolution calling for a ban for under-16s except if a parent decides otherwise is given. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a solid starting point," said one MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Earlier, momentum built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. One foundation set up by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to harmful social media material suggests that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah demands guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra access requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced laws mandating guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from some individuals to copy this example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from the West, other states are also considering moves.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

As this global debate unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.