🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing closely to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our children's childhood". A law could be enacted soon.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to pass a law raising the access 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 action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised parents to block their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," stated the parliamentarian driving the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in conclusive data".

Last year, interest built behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the family of a young person who died after viewing harmful social media material argues that a simple age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design tools that are safe and fit for minors," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional level amid federal inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra time requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed laws requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to mimic this example, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond the West, other states are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world agencies take a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The organization points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve user protection.

As this global discussion continues, the steps of the Australian government and others indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.