🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's childhood". A law is expected to be formalized soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is given. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," commented a leading MEP driving the resolution.

Britain: A Watchful Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the administration pledged to investigate the matter.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after viewing harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a prominent peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is largely occurring at the state level due to federal inaction.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra access needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted bills demanding parental consent for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to mimic Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond these regions, other nations are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more measured stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

As this worldwide debate continues, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer willing to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.