🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

The European Trend

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward comparable measures.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". A law is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "one of the options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to approve a law lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended families to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a advisory statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is granted. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a useful foundation," stated the parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any decision must be "based on robust data".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing harmful online content argues that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, action is largely occurring at the regional level amid national stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced laws mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from some politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Outside of these regions, further countries are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations adopt a more measured stance. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "might backfire". The body notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

As this worldwide debate unfolds, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer willing to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.