🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation could be formalized soon.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on lawmakers to approve a law raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to block their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it cautions of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a solid starting point," stated a leading MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Last year, interest grew behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government committed to investigate the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation established by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, legislation is primarily unfolding at the state level amid country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra use dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted laws mandating guardian approval for minors to create social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various individuals to follow this example, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Outside of the West, other countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

However, global bodies strike a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

Even as this global conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers globally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.