🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to ban social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are considering similar measures.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' youth". Legislation may be passed soon.
• Norway is set to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have suggested that an similar ban is "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on parliament to pass a proposal raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended families to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is granted. While it cautions of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a useful foundation," said one MEP behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the administration has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but stressing any action must be "based on strong data".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration pledged to further research the matter.

Charities have expressed warnings. An organization established by the relatives of a teenager who died after encountering dangerous platform posts argues that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for children," commented a leading peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the regional government level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law restricting minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further time dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills requiring parental consent for minors to create social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from various politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are similarly exploring options.

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

But, global bodies strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

As this worldwide debate unfolds, the actions of Australia and its followers show that policymakers globally are no longer prepared to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.