The nation's controversial move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.
The European Movement
Across Europe, a rising group of nations are considering similar restrictions.
- Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed soon.
- Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
- The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban is "one of the tools on the table".
- In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to approve a bill raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
- In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
- The administration in the Netherlands has urged guardians to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for under-16s unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.
"An effective age limit is a good starting point," said a leading MEP supporting the resolution.
Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye
Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".
Last year, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the topic.
Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. One foundation founded by the relatives of a teenager who died after encountering dangerous social media material argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.
"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to design products and services that are safe and fit for children," commented a leading child protection advocate.
The United States: A State-by-State Approach
Across America, regulation is largely happening at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.
- The state of Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
- Florida has passed a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
- Virginia has approved a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access needing parental permission.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.
Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain individuals to copy the Australian example, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
International Outlook
Apart from these regions, further states are also exploring options.
- Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.
However, international agencies adopt a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in safety.
Even as this international conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.
