🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and families are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

The European Movement

Across Europe, a rising number of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that phones and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law may be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an similar ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on the legislature to pass a law raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged parents to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is given. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid first step," said one parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "based on robust evidence".

Last year, support grew behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a young person who died after viewing disturbing platform posts argues that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for young users," commented a prominent peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, action is mostly occurring at the state level amid country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws mandating parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from some figures to mimic the Australian path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Beyond the West, other states are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global organizations take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

As this international debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that policymakers globally are increasingly content to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.