🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a growing number of nations are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation may be passed soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an similar ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged the legislature to pass a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has urged guardians to restrict their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic motion supporting a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age limit is a good first step," commented a leading MEP driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in strong research".

Earlier, support built behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the family of a teenager who took her own life after encountering dangerous platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for minors," commented a leading child protection advocate.

America: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, legislation is primarily occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws demanding guardian approval for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from various politicians to follow the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Apart from the West, further states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could backfire". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

As this worldwide conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that policymakers globally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.