🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are watching intently to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a increasing number of states are moving toward similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and apps are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "power of the algorithms".
• 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 leader has urged parliament to enact a proposal raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged guardians to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," commented a leading parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after encountering disturbing platform posts contends that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build tools that are safe and age appropriate for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, legislation is largely happening at the state government level amid national stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra use requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced laws demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to follow Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Apart from the West, further countries are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more nuanced position. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

While this international debate continues, the steps of the Australian government and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.