🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and families are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of countries are exploring comparable restrictions.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban could be "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to approve a law increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised families to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory statement demanding a ban for minors without parental consent is granted. While it warns of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a solid starting point," said the MEP supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Last year, support built behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing social media material argues that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are safe and age appropriate for young users," stated a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, legislation is primarily unfolding at the regional government level amid national inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed measures requiring adult authorization for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from various figures to follow the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional countries are also considering moves.

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

But, international organizations take a more nuanced position. Unicef has warned that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

Even as this international conversation continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.