🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and parents are watching intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law may be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban could be "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic motion demanding a ban for minors without guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a good starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "based on robust data".

Last year, interest built behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the family of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for children," said a prominent peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is primarily occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah demands parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures mandating guardian approval for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain individuals to follow Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, other states are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world organizations adopt a more measured tone. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this global debate continues, the policies of this nation and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.