The nation's bold policy to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.
European Movement
In Europe, a growing chorus of states are considering similar measures.
- Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". Legislation is expected to be passed in the coming year.
- Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
- Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential measures under consideration".
- In Spain, the president has urged parliament to enact a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
- In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The government in the Netherlands has urged guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory statement demanding a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.
"A strong age barrier is a good starting point," said the European lawmaker behind the initiative.
Britain: A Watchful Approach
For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "grounded in strong evidence".
Earlier, momentum built behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the issue.
Charities have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the family of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens turn 16.
"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and fit for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.
The US: A Fragmented Landscape
In the United States, legislation is primarily occurring at the state government level due to national gridlock.
- The state of Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
- The state of Florida has passed a law banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
- Virginia has enacted a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra use needing a guardian's okay.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced laws requiring parental consent for minors to open social media accounts.
Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain figures to copy this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.
Global Outlook
Outside of Europe and the US, other nations are similarly exploring options.
- Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
- Brazil has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.
But, global agencies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.
While this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and several other countries indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.
