🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of nations are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that phones and apps are "taking away our children's youth". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a law lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged families to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is given. Even though it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"A strong age limit is a good first step," said a leading MEP driving the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Last year, support grew behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. One foundation founded by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after viewing harmful social media material contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to design tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, regulation is primarily unfolding at the state level due to national gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted measures demanding adult authorization for minors to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from some individuals to mimic this example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from the West, further countries are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, international bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve user protection.

As this global conversation continues, the policies of this nation and several other countries show that states around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.