🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a growing group of nations are moving toward comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". The policy could be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on lawmakers to enact a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a non-binding statement demanding a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful starting point," stated a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "based on robust evidence".

Last year, support gathered behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a young person who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for children," said a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, action is primarily happening at the regional government level due to country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra access needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted measures mandating guardian approval for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to follow the Australian path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Outlook

Outside of these regions, further countries are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies strike a more nuanced position. Unicef has advised that social media bans have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries demonstrate that states globally are no longer willing to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.