🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering similar bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". The policy is expected to be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have stated that an similar ban remains "a potential measures on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to approve a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s without parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" design of these services, the step does not establish binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," said the European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are secure and fit for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, action is largely occurring at the local government level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping under-16s to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to follow Australia's lead, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Beyond Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise considering moves.

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

Yet, international agencies adopt a more measured position. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "might backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

As this worldwide discussion unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and others show that states globally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to self-regulate.