🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are observing closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for other nations.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of states are considering parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to enact a proposal raising the minimum age for accessing 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 related action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged families to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic statement supporting a ban for minors except if guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a solid foundation," stated the parliamentarian supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong data".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. However, the government pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing disturbing social media material argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, regulation is primarily happening at the regional level due to country-wide gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping under-16s 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 similarly enacted laws mandating adult authorization for minors to create social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various individuals to follow Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, global bodies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in safety.

As this global debate continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.