🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are watching intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to approve a law lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these services, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a good first step," stated the parliamentarian supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the administration has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in strong data".

Last year, support built behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised concerns. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a girl who died after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, regulation is largely occurring at the regional level due to national stalemate.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional use needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to mimic this path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies take a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

Even as this international debate continues, the steps of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers globally are less and less willing to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.