🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold move to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising number of countries are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "robbing our children's youth". A law may be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to pass a bill lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a related step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. Although it highlights of the "addictive" nature of these apps, the step does not enact binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a useful foundation," commented one European lawmaker supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by conclusive research".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design products and services that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a leading child protection advocate.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, legislation is largely occurring at the regional level amid national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a rule restricting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further use requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from various figures to follow this example, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Beyond the West, further countries are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, international agencies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could prove counterproductive". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

While this international discussion continues, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.