🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our children's innocence". The policy may be enacted soon.
• Norway is preparing to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to approve a law lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is granted. Although it highlights of the "addictive" nature of these services, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a useful first step," said one MEP driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a future ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "based on strong research".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. An organization set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are safe and suitable for minors," commented a prominent peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, action is largely happening at the regional level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted laws mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from some politicians to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations take a more measured stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

As this international debate evolves, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that governments globally are no longer content to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.