🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to ban social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a growing group of states are considering comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that smartphones and apps are "stealing our children's innocence". A law is expected to be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked the legislature to pass a bill raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is granted. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not enact binding law.

"A strong age limit is a good starting point," commented a leading MEP driving the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the administration pledged to further research the issue.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after encountering harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and suitable for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

Across America, legislation is primarily unfolding at the state government level due to national gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a law barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with additional access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted laws requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to follow Australia's path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, other states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world organizations adopt a more nuanced tone. Unicef has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "might backfire". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

While this worldwide discussion unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states globally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.