The nation's decisive policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.
The European Momentum
Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering parallel restrictions.
- Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that smartphones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' childhood". A law could be formalized soon.
- Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the algorithms".
- The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban remains "one of the tools on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to pass a law raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
- In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
- The administration in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their kids from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion calling for a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.
"A clear age barrier is a good foundation," commented one MEP supporting the measure.
The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance
In the UK, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "based on strong evidence".
Last year, interest gathered behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the issue.
Charities have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content contends that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people become eligible.
"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and fit for young users," stated a prominent child protection advocate.
The United States: A State-by-State Landscape
Across America, action is primarily happening at the local level against a backdrop of federal inaction.
- Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
- Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has approved a rule limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra use dependent on adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures demanding parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles.
Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various figures to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.
International Outlook
Beyond Europe and the US, other states are likewise taking action.
- Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.
However, international organizations take a more cautious position. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to prioritize safety.
As this worldwide conversation evolves, the steps of Australia and others show that states internationally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.
