🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of nations are moving toward parallel measures.

• The Danish government has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our children's youth". A law may be formalized soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to enact a bill increasing the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not create binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a solid foundation," commented the parliamentarian behind the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "supported by robust evidence".

Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after viewing harmful online content suggests that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are safe and suitable for minors," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, legislation is largely occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of national gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted bills mandating guardian approval for minors to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to copy the Australian lead, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Views

Apart from these regions, other states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, international bodies strike a more nuanced stance. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in safety.

As this international debate continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that governments globally are less and less content to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.