🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that smartphones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". A law may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked parliament to pass a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended families to block their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement demanding a ban for minors without parental consent is granted. While it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the move does not enact binding law.

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

Britain: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong evidence".

Previously, support built behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately modified. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a young person who died after encountering disturbing online content suggests that a strict age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for children," said a prominent peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, regulation is mostly happening at the local level due to federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further time dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted laws mandating parental consent for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain figures to copy the Australian lead, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Beyond these regions, further states are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The agency points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

While this worldwide debate continues, the actions of Australia and its followers show that governments around the world are less and less willing to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.