🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are watching intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "robbing our kids' youth". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is set to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to approve a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to prevent their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic motion supporting a ban for under-16s without parental consent is given. Although it warns of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the step does not create binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," commented the European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in conclusive data".

Last year, momentum built behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the government vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a simple age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," stated a prominent peer.

America: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, action is primarily occurring at the local level amid national stalemate.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to mimic the Australian path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world organizations take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "could backfire". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the policies of Australia and several other countries indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.