🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples internationally. Officials, child protection groups, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising number of countries are moving toward comparable bans.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and networks are "robbing our children's childhood". A law could be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to approve a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," commented one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in conclusive research".

Last year, momentum grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. However, the government committed to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous platform posts suggests that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, action is primarily occurring at the local government level amid national gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra time needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to follow Australia's path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Beyond the West, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world organizations adopt a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this global discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that governments internationally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.