🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to ban social media access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation may be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an similar ban remains "an options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a proposal increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution calling for a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. While it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," said the European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong evidence".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration pledged to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to build products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," said a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is mostly happening at the regional government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills requiring guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various figures to follow the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Apart from the West, other nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, global organizations strike a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve safety.

Even as this global conversation evolves, the policies of this nation and others show that states around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.