🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a increasing chorus of states are exploring similar restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our kids' childhood". Legislation could be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban could be "an tools on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged the legislature to pass a proposal increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has recommended a related step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the move does not enact binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a useful starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian behind the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, interest grew behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the matter.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to create products and services that are secure and fit for children," stated a influential online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, action is largely unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures demanding guardian approval for under-16s to create social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from some individuals to mimic the Australian path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of these regions, further states are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to prohibit social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies strike a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans have downsides and "may even backfire". The body notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

While this global debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to delay for the industry to self-regulate.