🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to ban social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are exploring comparable measures.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to enact a bill raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a advisory statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a solid foundation," stated a leading MEP driving the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any policy must be "based on strong evidence".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the administration committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, regulation is mostly happening at the local level due to country-wide stalemate.

• Utah requires adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has signed a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a regulation restricting under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with any further use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills demanding guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to copy Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Apart from the West, additional nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international debate unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.