The nation's bold move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.
Across Europe Momentum
In Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring parallel measures.
- Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be formalized soon.
- Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
- Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to enact a law increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The government in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory statement demanding a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is given. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these services, the move does not create mandatory rules.
"A clear age limit is a solid first step," said one parliamentarian behind the initiative.
The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance
For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong research".
Earlier, momentum gathered behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the matter.
Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a girl who took her own life after viewing harmful platform posts suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.
"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to build tools that are safe and age appropriate for children," said a leading peer.
The US: A Decentralized Picture
Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the local level amid country-wide stalemate.
- Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
- Florida has passed a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring parental permission.
- The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.
Even with widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
Worldwide Outlook
Outside of Europe and the US, further nations are similarly considering moves.
- Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.
Yet, international organizations strike a more measured tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.
Even as this international debate continues, the policies of Australia and its followers indicate that policymakers globally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.
