🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a growing chorus of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our kids' innocence". A law could be formalized soon.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to enact a law raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for minors without parental consent is granted. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a good first step," said a leading European lawmaker supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any decision must be "grounded in strong data".

Last year, momentum built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. An organization set up by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," stated a prominent peer.

America: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, legislation is mostly unfolding at the state government level due to federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra time dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to create social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to mimic Australia's example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Views

Beyond the West, additional countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world agencies adopt a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this global discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.