🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Movement

Across Europe, a rising group of states are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "taking away our children's youth". Legislation may be formalized soon.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban remains "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the move does not create binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a good first step," commented one European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Earlier, support grew behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the administration pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. An organization established by the relatives of a girl who was lost after being exposed to disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users 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 children," stated a influential child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, legislation is mostly happening at the local level due to federal inaction.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures requiring guardian approval for minors to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain individuals to copy this path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, additional nations are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global bodies adopt a more measured stance. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in safety.

As this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.