🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to approve a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged guardians to restrict their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding statement calling for a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful first step," stated one MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "based on conclusive research".

Earlier, interest built behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. One foundation founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous social media material contends that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to build products and services that are secure and fit for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, legislation is primarily occurring at the regional level due to country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a rule capping minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to copy the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, additional nations are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this global debate unfolds, the actions of this nation and others demonstrate that states internationally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.