🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a growing number of nations are considering parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation could be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to pass a bill increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these services, the step does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. However, the government pledged to further research the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation established by the family of a young person who died after being exposed to dangerous social media material contends that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to design tools that are safe and age appropriate for children," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, action is largely occurring at the regional level amid national gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures mandating parental consent for minors to create social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to follow this example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other states are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global organizations strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

While this worldwide conversation continues, the policies of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.