🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching closely to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising number of countries are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our kids' childhood". A law could be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged families to prevent their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for minors unless parental consent is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful first step," commented the European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. However, the government pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who died after being exposed to dangerous social media material contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," stated a prominent peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, regulation is mostly unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting teenagers to one hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures mandating adult authorization for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain figures to follow the Australian path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Beyond the West, further countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world organizations take a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve user protection.

As this global debate continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers indicate that states internationally are increasingly content to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.