🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are moving toward parallel bans.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". A law may be formalized soon.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to pass a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to block their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a advisory motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it highlights of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a good starting point," said the MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any action must be "based on robust evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. An organization established by the family of a teenager who died after encountering harmful online content contends that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to build products and services that are secure and fit for young users," said a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the state level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and calls from various figures to follow the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Beyond these regions, other countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global bodies strike a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in safety.

While this international discussion unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and its followers indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.