🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Movement

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

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and networks are "robbing our children's childhood". A law could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is granted. While it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a useful starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian driving the resolution.

Britain: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is primarily unfolding at the state level amid national stalemate.

• Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and calls from various individuals to follow Australia's example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond these regions, other states are likewise exploring options.

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

But, international bodies adopt a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve safety.

As this international discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.