The nation's controversial policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.
European Movement
Across Europe, a increasing number of states are exploring comparable measures.
- The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be passed soon.
- The Norwegian government is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
- The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media participants. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options under consideration".
- In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to enact a bill increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.
For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s without parental consent is granted. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the step does not enact mandatory rules.
"A strong age barrier is a solid foundation," said the MEP behind the measure.
The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance
Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".
Last year, support built behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.
Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a simple age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.
"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a prominent peer.
America: A Fragmented Picture
In the United States, action is largely happening at the regional level amid country-wide gridlock.
- The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
- Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
- Virginia has approved a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.
Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some figures to mimic the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.
Worldwide Perspectives
Apart from the West, further states are similarly considering moves.
- The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.
However, global bodies adopt a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.
As this international conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.
