🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' youth". A law is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to approve a bill lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is granted. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age limit is a useful first step," stated the parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the government pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a girl who died after being exposed to disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, regulation is primarily happening at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• Utah demands parental consent for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise passed laws requiring guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some politicians to follow this lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of the West, further nations are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could backfire". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in safety.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the policies of the Australian government and others show that states globally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.