🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Trend

In Europe, a growing chorus of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that smartphones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". Legislation may be formalized soon.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to approve a bill lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to block their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a useful first step," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust data".

Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. One foundation established by the family of a teenager who died after encountering dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to design products and services that are safe and fit for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the local government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional time dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to follow this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, further states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, international bodies strike a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

While this international debate unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that policymakers around the world are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.