🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are considering comparable bans.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation may be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban is "an options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to enact a bill lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged guardians to block their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it highlights of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a good starting point," stated one MEP supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but stressing any policy must be "based on strong data".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised apprehensions. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a teenager who died after being exposed to dangerous platform posts argues that a simple age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, regulation is primarily happening at the regional level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law restricting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced laws requiring parental consent for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from some politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Beyond Europe and the US, additional states are also exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations take a more nuanced stance. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

Even as this worldwide discussion continues, the steps of this nation and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.