🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold move to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to approve a proposal raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a advisory statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is provided. Although it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these services, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid foundation," said the MEP supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "based on strong data".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration committed to further research the topic.

Charities have voiced concerns. One foundation founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," said a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, regulation is largely happening at the local level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a bill banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule capping under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with any further time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed laws mandating guardian approval for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from some individuals to follow the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Apart from the West, additional states are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, global organizations strike a more cautious tone. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this global conversation continues, the policies of Australia and its followers show that policymakers globally are increasingly willing to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.