🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and families are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising group of countries are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that smartphones and apps are "robbing our youngsters' youth". A law is expected to be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged guardians to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a advisory resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is given. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a useful first step," said one parliamentarian driving the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. An organization established by the family of a young person who died after viewing harmful social media material argues that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for minors," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, action is largely happening at the regional level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted measures requiring parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various politicians to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

International Views

Apart from these regions, further states are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies take a more cautious stance. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

As this worldwide conversation unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.