🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and apps are "robbing our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a law increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory motion demanding a ban for minors unless guardian approval is given. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

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

The UK: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the government pledged to further research the issue.

Charities have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the family of a girl who was lost after viewing dangerous platform posts argues that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build products and services that are safe and fit for children," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, legislation is primarily occurring at the state government level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with any further use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills mandating guardian approval for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from certain individuals to mimic the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of these regions, additional nations are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies adopt a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

While this global debate unfolds, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less prepared to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.