🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of nations are considering parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our youngsters' youth". Legislation could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to protect young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "an options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to pass a proposal increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended families to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding motion demanding a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. Even though it warns of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a solid starting point," stated one European lawmaker driving the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "based on robust research".

Previously, interest grew behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to investigate the topic.

Charities have raised apprehensions. An organization established by the relatives of a young person who died after viewing harmful social media material contends that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to create tools that are appropriate and fit for children," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is mostly occurring at the state government level due to federal inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law restricting under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with additional use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding adult authorization for minors to create social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to copy this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, further states are likewise considering moves.

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

But, global bodies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

While this international discussion continues, the policies of Australia and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.