🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of states are considering similar bans.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and networks are "robbing our youngsters' youth". Legislation may be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have indicated that an similar ban is "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised parents to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it warns of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a good starting point," stated a leading MEP driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "based on strong data".

Last year, support gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, regulation is primarily unfolding at the state government level amid country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional use needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to mimic Australia's path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, other countries are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, international organizations take a more measured position. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The agency points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve user protection.

Even as this global debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.