🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing intently to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are moving toward similar measures.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' youth". The policy may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked the legislature to pass a proposal increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a advisory statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is given. Although it warns of the "compulsive" design of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," stated the MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the administration has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "based on strong research".

Last year, support built behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the government vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised warnings. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after encountering harmful social media material argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is mostly occurring at the local level amid federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and calls from some figures to follow Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Apart from the West, further countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world organizations adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The organization points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide conversation continues, the actions of this nation and several other countries indicate that states globally are increasingly content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.