🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and families are observing with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of states are considering parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". A law could be enacted next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to approve a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a related step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the step does not establish binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a solid foundation," commented a leading MEP supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any action must be "based on strong data".

Earlier, momentum built behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Charities have voiced warnings. One foundation founded by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to build products and services that are safe and fit for minors," commented a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, action is mostly occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Outside of these regions, further countries are also exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies take a more measured stance. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might backfire". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this global conversation unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that policymakers around the world are increasingly content to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.