🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are observing closely to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising chorus of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". The policy may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on lawmakers to pass a proposal raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a related action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a advisory resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is granted. While it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the move does not enact binding law.

"A clear age limit is a good starting point," said one European lawmaker driving the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "based on conclusive research".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the issue.

Charities have expressed concerns. An organization set up by the family of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, action is mostly unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation restricting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures demanding parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to follow Australia's path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, other nations are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations take a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "may even backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this global discussion continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that governments internationally are no longer content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.