🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our children's youth". A law could be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban could be "an measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for minors except if parental consent is given. Although it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age limit is a solid first step," stated the European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the government has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in conclusive research".

Previously, support built behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after encountering harmful social media material suggests that a simple age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the regional level due to national stalemate.

• Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills demanding parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from certain politicians to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of the West, additional states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global organizations take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this international debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are less and less content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.