The nation's bold action to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
The European Momentum
In Europe, a rising group of nations are considering parallel measures.
- Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that smartphones and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
- Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
- The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential measures under consideration".
- In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The administration in the Netherlands has urged families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.
At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.
"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," commented the parliamentarian behind the resolution.
Britain: A Cautious Approach
In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by conclusive data".
Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.
Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the family of a young person who took her own life after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban might not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for young users," stated a influential child protection advocate.
The United States: A Decentralized Approach
Stateside, regulation is primarily unfolding at the state government level amid national inaction.
- Utah demands guardian permission for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
- Florida has signed a bill banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
- The state of Virginia has approved a regulation limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra time needing parental permission.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed measures demanding guardian approval for under-16s to create social media presences.
Even with widespread concern and calls from some figures to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.
International Outlook
Outside of the West, further countries are similarly taking action.
- The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
- Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.
But, global bodies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The body points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.
While this global debate unfolds, the steps of this nation and several other countries show that states internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.
