🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are watching with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". The policy may be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to approve a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged families to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is provided. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," said the MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by strong research".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. One foundation set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after encountering disturbing platform posts argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to build tools that are secure and suitable for minors," stated a influential peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, legislation is primarily occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a law capping minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating adult authorization for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from some figures to mimic the Australian lead, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, further nations are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations strike a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

While this international conversation unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers globally are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.