🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our kids' childhood". A law is expected to be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to pass a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a advisory statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is granted. While it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the move does not create binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," stated a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "supported by robust evidence".

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

Charities have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to create tools that are safe and suitable for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various figures to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Apart from these regions, further countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies strike a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

As this international debate unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states globally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.