🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". Legislation could be passed soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to approve a law increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory statement demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is granted. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a solid foundation," commented a leading European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Last year, interest grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering dangerous social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are safe and suitable for children," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, regulation is largely unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain individuals to copy this lead, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Views

Apart from Europe and the US, other states are also exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global bodies strike a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of this nation and others show that governments internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.