🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are watching intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban could be "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to pass a law increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged parents to restrict their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," commented the parliamentarian driving the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "supported by robust data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. However, the administration pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a young person who was lost after being exposed to harmful platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to design products and services that are secure and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely unfolding at the local government level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with extra time needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed bills requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain politicians to copy the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Beyond these regions, further states are also taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world organizations strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve user protection.

While this international conversation continues, the policies of Australia and others demonstrate that states globally are no longer content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.