🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our children's childhood". Legislation may be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a proposal lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" design of these services, the step does not establish binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," said a leading MEP behind the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have expressed concerns. One foundation set up by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering dangerous social media material argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and fit for minors," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the state level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law restricting under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with any further use requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted bills requiring adult authorization for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to mimic Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Views

Outside of these regions, further countries are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this international debate continues, the steps of this nation and several other countries indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.