🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to ban social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a increasing number of states are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". A law may be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media users. Officials have suggested that an similar ban is "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to pass a law lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the move does not establish binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a useful first step," said one parliamentarian driving the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. One foundation established by the loved ones of a teenager who died after viewing harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, action is primarily occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation restricting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills requiring guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from certain individuals to mimic this lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from the West, other nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international agencies adopt a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

While this international debate continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.