🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing group of nations are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that smartphones and apps are "stealing our children's childhood". Legislation may be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged parliament to approve a law lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it highlights of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a solid first step," commented the European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Earlier, support grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Charities have voiced warnings. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing online content suggests that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for minors," stated a leading peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the state level amid national gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain figures to follow the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies take a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even backfire". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

As this global discussion evolves, the policies of the Australian government and its followers indicate that policymakers around the world are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.