🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a increasing group of nations are moving toward comparable restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our kids' childhood". A law may be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is granted. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a useful starting point," said a leading parliamentarian supporting the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to create tools that are secure and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, action is largely happening at the regional level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah requires adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with extra access dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted laws requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to follow this path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Outside of the West, further countries are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations strike a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

Even as this worldwide discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.