🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are observing intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our children's childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban could be "an options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged parliament to approve a proposal lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic statement supporting a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "addictive" quality of these services, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"A clear age limit is a solid starting point," said the European lawmaker behind the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "based on strong research".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. An organization founded by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are safe and suitable for minors," said a leading peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, regulation is largely unfolding at the local level due to federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a bill prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with any further time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding parental consent for minors to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to follow the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, further nations are also considering moves.

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

Yet, international bodies adopt a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the policies of this nation and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.