🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Trend

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that phones and platforms are "stealing our children's youth". The policy could be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to approve a law lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a non-binding statement calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the step does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a solid first step," stated one MEP behind the resolution.

The UK: 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 policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering harmful social media material suggests that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for children," commented a influential online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, legislation is primarily occurring at the state government level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various figures to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of these regions, additional states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international agencies adopt a more measured position. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.

As this global discussion unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and others indicate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to self-regulate.