🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for other nations.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a rising group of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized soon.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban could be "a potential options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. Although it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a useful foundation," said one parliamentarian driving the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the administration has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by strong data".

Last year, interest built behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. An organization set up by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after viewing disturbing platform posts suggests that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to create tools that are safe and fit for children," commented a influential online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the local level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule restricting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills demanding parental consent for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from some individuals to copy this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

International Views

Outside of these regions, other countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations strike a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

While this global discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others indicate that states globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.