🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to ban social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and families are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing chorus of states are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban remains "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to approve a bill raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a advisory resolution calling for a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a useful foundation," said the European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in strong data".

Previously, momentum built behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a girl who was lost after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users become eligible.

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

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Stateside, legislation is primarily occurring at the regional level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with any further time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed laws requiring guardian approval for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some individuals to follow the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Outside of these regions, other states are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

But, international agencies strike a more measured stance. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The body points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

As this global debate unfolds, the actions of this nation and others demonstrate that policymakers globally are increasingly willing to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.