🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social media access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

In Europe, a growing chorus of countries are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that phones and platforms are "stealing our kids' youth". Legislation could be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on parliament to approve a law increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid foundation," stated the parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "supported by robust evidence".

Earlier, interest built behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the family of a young person who died after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when users turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to design products and services that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely happening at the local government level due to national inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some politicians to mimic the Australian lead, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

Beyond Europe and the US, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations take a more cautious tone. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in safety.

Even as this global debate continues, the steps of Australia and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.