🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing group of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a advisory resolution supporting a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a good starting point," stated the MEP behind the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after viewing dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when users turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, regulation is primarily happening at the regional government level amid country-wide stalemate.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a regulation limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills requiring adult authorization for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various figures to mimic the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional nations are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations strike a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this worldwide conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.