🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a growing group of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that phones and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". A law may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a similar action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful foundation," commented one European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. An organization set up by the loved ones of a teenager who died after being exposed to harmful social media material suggests that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and suitable for young users," commented a prominent peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the regional level amid national stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from some politicians to follow this lead, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Outside of these regions, additional states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, global bodies adopt a more measured stance. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

As this global discussion unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others show that policymakers globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.