🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to pass a proposal increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for minors except if parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

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

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye

In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong research".

Earlier, support gathered behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government committed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous platform posts suggests that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are secure and fit for minors," commented a prominent peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, legislation is largely happening at the regional level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a law capping minors to one hour of social media access per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws mandating guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from some politicians to follow Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Beyond Europe and the US, other states are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world agencies strike a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

As this international conversation continues, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries show that governments internationally are less and less content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.