🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Trend

Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward similar bans.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". Legislation may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "an tools on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked parliament to approve a law raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the move does not enact binding law.

"A clear age limit is a good foundation," commented one parliamentarian driving the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the government has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust research".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when users turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to build tools that are appropriate and fit for children," stated a influential peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, legislation is largely occurring at the local level due to national stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with extra time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted bills demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to mimic the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Views

Apart from the West, other states are also exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies adopt a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The agency points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve user protection.

Even as this worldwide discussion evolves, the actions of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer willing to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.