🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of states are exploring comparable bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our kids' innocence". The policy may be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a law raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic motion demanding a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A clear age limit is a useful foundation," said one MEP driving the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Previously, support built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed concerns. An organization set up by the family of a teenager who was lost after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," said a influential online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, action is primarily unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to mimic Australia's example, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Outside of these regions, further nations are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

But, global bodies strike a more measured stance. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "might have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in safety.

Even as this worldwide debate unfolds, the policies of Australia and several other countries show that states globally are no longer content to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.