🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are observing intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing group of states are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that mobile devices and networks are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed soon.
• Norway is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on lawmakers to enact a bill lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of 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 Netherlands has recommended parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a advisory motion calling for a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it warns of the "addictive" design of these services, the step does not enact binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "supported by strong research".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts argues that a simple age ban might not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are appropriate and fit for minors," stated a leading child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is mostly happening at the regional level due to federal inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from some individuals to follow this example, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Apart from the West, additional states are likewise taking action.

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

However, global organizations take a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

As this international discussion evolves, the policies of the Australian government and its followers indicate that governments around the world are less and less willing to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.