🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and families are monitoring closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our kids' innocence". The policy may be enacted next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the user details of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged lawmakers to pass a bill raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a useful first step," commented one MEP behind the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in strong research".

Last year, support gathered behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed concerns. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a girl who was lost after encountering disturbing platform posts contends that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to build products and services that are appropriate and fit for minors," stated a influential online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Stateside, legislation is mostly occurring at the regional level amid federal inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding adult authorization for minors to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from some politicians to follow the Australian example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Apart from the West, additional nations are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world agencies take a more measured position. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "may even backfire". The organization points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

Even as this international discussion unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that states globally are no longer content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.