The nation's controversial action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.
European Momentum
Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are moving toward comparable restrictions.
- Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our kids' innocence". A law may be passed soon.
- Norway is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "influence of the AI".
- The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
- In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to pass a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
- The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a non-binding motion calling for a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is provided. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.
"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," stated a leading European lawmaker supporting the initiative.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye
Across Britain, the government has remained open to a future ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust evidence".
Previously, interest built behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the administration committed to conduct more studies the topic.
Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. One foundation founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after viewing disturbing platform posts contends that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens reach the legal age.
"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.
The US: A State-by-State Picture
Stateside, regulation is primarily occurring at the state level against a backdrop of federal inaction.
- Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
- The state of Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
- Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with any further time requiring adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding guardian approval for minors to create social media profiles.
Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.
International Outlook
Outside of Europe and the US, other states are similarly exploring options.
- The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, world bodies adopt a more measured tone. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.
As this worldwide conversation continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries show that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.
