🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

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

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "robbing our kids' youth". Legislation may be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a law lifting the minimum age for joining 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 suggested a similar action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for minors unless parental consent is given. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," stated one European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "based on strong evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Charities have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, action is primarily happening at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a law capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted measures requiring parental consent for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain individuals to follow the Australian path, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Apart from the West, other countries are also considering moves.

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

However, world agencies take a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this international conversation continues, the steps of the Australian government and its followers show that states around the world are no longer prepared to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.