🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "an options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked the legislature to enact a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is granted. Although it cautions of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a solid first step," said a leading parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a girl who died after viewing harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to build tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, legislation is primarily happening at the regional government level due to federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule capping minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced measures requiring adult authorization for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to mimic this example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Beyond the West, other countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, global bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in safety.

As this international debate unfolds, the actions of this nation and its followers show that governments internationally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.