🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are observing closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation could be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to pass a bill raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic motion demanding a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. While it highlights of the "addictive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid first step," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the government vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. An organization founded by the loved ones of a girl who died after encountering harmful social media material contends that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to design tools that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Approach

Across America, legislation is primarily happening at the regional government level amid national inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to mimic Australia's path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Views

Beyond the West, additional nations are also exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

As this international conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states around the world are increasingly willing to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.