🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and families are observing closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of nations are moving toward similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "an tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a advisory motion calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a useful foundation," commented the European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "supported by conclusive data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for children," stated a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the state level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure barring those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional use needing parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise passed bills requiring adult authorization for minors to create social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to mimic this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional states are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The organization notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

While this global debate continues, the steps of Australia and others show that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.