🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to ban social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising number of countries are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended families to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory statement calling for a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it highlights of the "addictive" nature of these services, the step does not establish binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," said a leading European lawmaker driving the initiative.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "based on conclusive data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. An organization established by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after viewing harmful online content suggests that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are safe and fit for young users," stated a influential peer.

America: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, legislation is primarily occurring at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation limiting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with extra access requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted bills demanding parental consent for minors to open social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and calls from some individuals to copy the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Beyond Europe and the US, further states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations adopt a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.

As this international debate evolves, the actions of Australia and its followers demonstrate that governments around the world are increasingly prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.