🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a rising number of states are moving toward similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban is "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these apps, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a solid starting point," said one MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, support gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. An organization set up by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after viewing harmful online content contends that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, regulation is largely unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule capping minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to mimic the Australian example, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, other states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, international bodies take a more cautious stance. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The body notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

As this international debate evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others show that governments internationally are no longer content to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.