🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that phones and networks are "taking away our kids' youth". A law could be passed next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "an measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for under-16s without parental consent is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a useful starting point," stated one MEP driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "based on strong data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. An organization founded by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for minors," stated a leading peer.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, action is mostly unfolding at the state government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a measure banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain politicians to mimic the Australian example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Beyond these regions, other states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

While this international debate evolves, the steps of Australia and several other countries show that states around the world are less and less prepared to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.