🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of states are moving toward similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban is "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to enact a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for minors without parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not establish binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a useful first step," stated one parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust research".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Charities have voiced warnings. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is primarily happening at the regional government level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule capping minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further access dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced laws demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to copy this lead, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Apart from the West, additional nations are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more nuanced position. Unicef has warned that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international conversation continues, the policies of Australia and others indicate that policymakers around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.