🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' youth". Legislation could be enacted next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on parliament to pass a law raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a comparable move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement demanding a ban for minors without guardian approval is given. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a solid foundation," stated a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the administration has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. An organization established by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous platform posts suggests that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and suitable for children," commented a leading peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly happening at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to create social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from some figures to follow this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Views

Outside of the West, other countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in safety.

Even as this international conversation continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.