🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our children's youth". A law is expected to be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an similar ban could be "an measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to approve a bill increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a comparable move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged parents to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the move does not establish binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a useful first step," stated one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any action must be "supported by conclusive data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Charities have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a young person who was lost after being exposed to disturbing online content argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for young users," commented a prominent peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely happening at the state level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a law limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra time needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced bills mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain figures to follow Australia's path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Beyond the West, other states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global bodies take a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in safety.

While this international conversation unfolds, the steps of this nation and its followers show that states internationally are less and less content to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.