🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are observing intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

In Europe, a rising chorus of countries are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the user details of social media account holders. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to approve a bill increasing the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a similar move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," said a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Last year, interest built behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Charities have voiced concerns. An organization established by the family of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to design products and services that are appropriate and suitable for children," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the local level amid country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law capping under-16s to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating adult authorization for minors to create social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some figures to mimic Australia's example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other countries are similarly taking action.

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

Yet, world agencies strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

While this worldwide discussion unfolds, the policies of Australia and others indicate that states globally are increasingly content to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.