🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive move to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

Across Europe, a rising chorus of nations are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to approve a bill raising the minimum 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 suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the resolution does not create binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," stated a leading MEP driving the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by robust data".

Last year, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who died after being exposed to harmful online content suggests that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a leading peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is largely occurring at the state government level amid country-wide inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various figures to copy Australia's path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond Europe and the US, additional states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies take a more nuanced tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans have downsides and "could backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this worldwide debate continues, the policies of Australia and others demonstrate that states globally are increasingly prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.