🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing number of nations are considering similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that phones and networks are "robbing our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "an measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has called on parliament to pass a law lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to block their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a advisory motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is given. While it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the step does not create binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a solid starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing harmful online content suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for children," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, action is mostly unfolding at the local level amid national gridlock.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures mandating adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various individuals to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, other states are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global organizations strike a more cautious stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve safety.

As this worldwide conversation unfolds, the steps of this nation and its followers indicate that states globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.