🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a growing group of nations are considering similar measures.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "robbing our youngsters' childhood". A law is expected to be formalized soon.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has urged families to prevent their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the step does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful foundation," stated a leading European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in robust data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the family of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are appropriate and fit for children," said a influential online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, action is largely occurring at the regional level due to national stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra time dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating adult authorization for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to follow Australia's example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more measured tone. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve safety.

Even as this worldwide debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.