🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and families are watching closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

European Movement

Across Europe, a growing chorus of nations are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and networks are "robbing our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to approve a bill increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a related action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended families to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a useful starting point," said the parliamentarian driving the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust evidence".

Last year, interest built behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have voiced concerns. An organization established by the loved ones of a girl who died after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," stated a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, legislation is primarily happening at the regional level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a rule capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced bills requiring guardian approval for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain figures to copy this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, global organizations strike a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this global conversation evolves, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that states internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.