🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are observing closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Trend

In Europe, a growing number of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our kids' youth". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked lawmakers to pass a bill raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic motion demanding a ban for minors unless parental consent is granted. Although it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the step does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a good foundation," said one European lawmaker driving the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any action must be "based on conclusive data".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the government pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who died after encountering harmful online content argues that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are safe and fit for children," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

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

• The state of Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted measures requiring adult authorization for under-16s to create social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from certain individuals to copy the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, further states are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations adopt a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in safety.

While this international debate unfolds, the steps of Australia and its followers indicate that states internationally are no longer prepared to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.