🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and families are watching closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

European Momentum

In Europe, a rising group of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". The policy may be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked parliament to approve a bill raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding statement calling for a ban for under-16s without parental consent is given. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the step does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a good starting point," said the European lawmaker driving the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but stressing any action must be "based on conclusive data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the family of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to create tools that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, action is largely occurring at the state government level due to country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding adult authorization for minors to create social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from certain individuals to copy this lead, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Outside of these regions, further nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global bodies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "might backfire". The organization points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve safety.

As this worldwide discussion continues, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for the industry to self-regulate.