🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to restrict social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and parents are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a growing number of states are moving toward similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that smartphones and networks are "robbing our children's youth". Legislation could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to pass a proposal lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a similar step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged families to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic statement supporting a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is provided. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful first step," stated a leading MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Earlier, momentum built behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the administration vowed to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a girl who died after being exposed to dangerous online content suggests that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for children," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is largely unfolding at the local level amid national gridlock.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule limiting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to follow Australia's path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international conversation evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.