🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to enact a law increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised families to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a good first step," said a leading MEP driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "supported by strong data".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material contends that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a leading peer.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with any further access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted bills requiring adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from various individuals to mimic Australia's example, a federal ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, further states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, international agencies take a more cautious tone. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in safety.

While this international debate continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that states internationally are less and less willing to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.