🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are monitoring intently to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing group of countries are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our children's youth". A law could be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an similar ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged lawmakers to pass a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a related step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has urged parents to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion calling for a ban for under-16s without parental consent is provided. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a solid first step," commented one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong data".

Previously, interest built behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government pledged to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after being exposed to disturbing social media material contends that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a leading peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is primarily occurring at the local level amid national inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra access needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various figures to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of the West, further nations are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, world agencies strike a more cautious stance. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

As this global discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are no longer content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.