🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that phones and platforms are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy could be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to pass a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for minors unless guardian approval is given. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these services, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a useful first step," said the MEP behind the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a young person who died after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is primarily occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional use needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to create social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to mimic the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, other nations are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations strike a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The body highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve user protection.

As this worldwide discussion evolves, the actions of Australia and its followers demonstrate that governments globally are no longer content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.