🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing number of countries are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our kids' childhood". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised parents to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding statement supporting a ban for minors without parental consent is given. While it warns of the "addictive" design of these apps, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," commented one parliamentarian driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by conclusive data".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. One foundation established by the relatives of a girl who died after encountering harmful social media material suggests that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are safe and fit for young users," said a influential online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, legislation is mostly occurring at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from certain figures to mimic this example, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, international bodies take a more nuanced position. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this international conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries show that states globally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.