🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

In Europe, a rising number of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that mobile devices and networks are "robbing our youngsters' youth". A law could be passed soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to pass a proposal lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged parents to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is granted. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a solid starting point," said the parliamentarian driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "based on robust data".

Earlier, interest built behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised concerns. A prominent charity established by the family of a young person who died after encountering disturbing social media material argues that a strict age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when users turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for young users," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, legislation is largely happening at the state level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various figures to follow this example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, additional states are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations strike a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.

As this worldwide conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that governments globally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.