🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a growing group of states are considering comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to approve a proposal lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for minors except if parental consent is provided. Although it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a good foundation," commented a leading European lawmaker driving the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. However, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, legislation is primarily unfolding at the state level due to country-wide gridlock.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping minors to one hour of social media use per day, with extra access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures mandating guardian approval for minors to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to copy Australia's path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, additional nations are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world agencies strike a more cautious position. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

While this international discussion continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that states globally are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.