🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, campaigners, and parents are observing closely to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a increasing number of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that smartphones and apps are "robbing our kids' youth". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to enact a law lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged families to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a useful foundation," stated one parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, support grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. However, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the family of a girl who died after being exposed to harmful platform posts suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the regional government level amid federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further use needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws demanding parental consent for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to follow the Australian example, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Views

Beyond Europe and the US, other countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies strike a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

While this worldwide discussion evolves, the actions of this nation and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.