🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a rising group of countries are considering similar measures.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that phones and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". Legislation could be passed soon.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to pass a bill increasing the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a advisory resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a solid first step," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to build tools that are safe and suitable for minors," commented a influential peer.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is mostly unfolding at the regional level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures requiring guardian approval for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

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

But, international organizations take a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

As this international debate continues, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers globally are increasingly prepared to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.