🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing group of nations are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our youngsters' youth". Legislation could be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban is "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised families to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these apps, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," said one MEP driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust research".

Last year, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration committed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to harmful online content contends that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, regulation is mostly occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a regulation restricting teenagers to one hour of social media time per day, with additional use requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted bills mandating parental consent for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from certain politicians to mimic the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond these regions, additional countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even backfire". The body points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve safety.

As this international conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that governments internationally are increasingly content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.