🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to ban social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing group of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• The Danish government has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". The policy may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to pass a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a advisory motion supporting a ban for minors without guardian approval is granted. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a solid first step," said the European lawmaker supporting the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization founded by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing harmful social media material contends that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are safe and suitable for young users," stated a influential peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, action is mostly happening at the state level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional time requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills requiring parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from some individuals to follow the Australian example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Apart from these regions, other countries are also exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, global bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

Even as this global discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.