🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold action to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are observing intently to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a growing chorus of countries are exploring similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that phones and platforms are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "an tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged parliament to pass a proposal increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged families to block their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic statement demanding a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," stated the European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "based on strong data".

Earlier, support grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for young users," stated a leading peer.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, legislation is primarily unfolding at the state government level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah requires adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Apart from the West, further nations are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

As this worldwide debate continues, the actions of Australia and its followers demonstrate that governments internationally are increasingly prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.