🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are watching intently to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to pass a bill lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a similar step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged guardians to block their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. While it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a solid foundation," stated one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Earlier, interest built behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. However, the administration vowed to further research the issue.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. An organization set up by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is primarily happening at the state government level due to federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws requiring guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from various politicians to copy the Australian example, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. Unicef has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international conversation continues, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that governments around the world are increasingly willing to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.