🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering comparable measures.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and networks are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy may be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on parliament to pass a law increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is granted. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," said one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, momentum built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. One foundation founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing online content argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design tools that are appropriate and fit for minors," commented a prominent peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, action is largely unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws demanding guardian approval for minors to open social media accounts.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some politicians to copy Australia's lead, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Outside of Europe and the US, other nations are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The organization points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

While this worldwide conversation continues, the actions of this nation and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.