🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of nations are considering parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that smartphones and networks are "taking away our children's innocence". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to enact a bill lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," said one MEP supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. An organization established by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous platform posts suggests that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law capping minors to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various individuals to copy this lead, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world organizations strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might backfire". The organization notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this global conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.