🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing group of countries are considering similar restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban remains "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to pass a proposal raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has suggested a comparable action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised families to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is granted. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid foundation," commented a leading MEP behind the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but insisting any action must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. One foundation established by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after viewing harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when users turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to build products and services that are safe and age appropriate for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is mostly occurring at the state level amid federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra time needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills demanding adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some figures to follow the Australian lead, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond the West, further nations are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations adopt a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

While this worldwide discussion continues, the actions of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that governments globally are no longer content to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.