🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are observing closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

In Europe, a increasing group of countries are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our kids' innocence". Legislation could be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a bill raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a similar action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for minors except if parental consent is provided. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a useful first step," said one MEP supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but stressing any action must be "based on robust data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous platform posts contends that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create tools that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is largely unfolding at the state level due to country-wide gridlock.

• Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from various figures to follow Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Apart from the West, other states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies take a more nuanced stance. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this international debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that states globally are no longer prepared to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.