🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive policy to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Trend

In Europe, a growing number of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". A law may be passed soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "an options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked the legislature to pass a law raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has suggested a related action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged families 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 motion supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not establish binding law.

"A strong age limit is a solid starting point," said a leading MEP driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Last year, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. A prominent charity set up by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering dangerous online content argues that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for minors," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the regional government level amid national stalemate.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a law restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

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

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies strike a more cautious stance. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

While this global discussion continues, the steps of this nation and several other countries demonstrate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.