🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to ban social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing number of nations are moving toward similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked lawmakers to enact a law lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it highlights of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A clear age limit is a good starting point," stated one European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the government has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in robust research".

Earlier, momentum built behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government pledged to further research the matter.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the family of a girl who died after being exposed to dangerous social media material argues that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, legislation is largely unfolding at the local government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to follow the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, further nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global bodies adopt a more measured stance. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "could prove counterproductive". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this global debate evolves, the actions of this nation and several other countries indicate that governments internationally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.