The nation's controversial action to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.
European Movement
Across Europe, a rising group of states are considering comparable bans.
- The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our children's childhood". Legislation may be formalized soon.
- The Norwegian government is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
- Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
- In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
- In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The administration in The Dutch government has urged guardians to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for minors without parental consent is granted. While it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.
"A strong age restriction is a good first step," said a leading MEP supporting the resolution.
Britain: A Watchful Stance
In the UK, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "supported by strong data".
Previously, momentum built behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end weakened. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.
Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.
"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," stated a leading child protection advocate.
America: A Decentralized Landscape
Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the local level amid federal stalemate.
- Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
- Florida has signed a law prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
- Virginia has approved a regulation capping minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access requiring a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures demanding guardian approval for minors to create social media accounts.
Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to mimic the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.
Global Views
Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly considering moves.
- The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.
However, global agencies take a more cautious position. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.
As this worldwide debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.
