🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Across Europe, a growing group of states are moving toward comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked the legislature to pass a proposal raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a similar action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended families to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a advisory resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a good starting point," said one European lawmaker driving the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in conclusive data".

Previously, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the government pledged to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. One foundation set up by the family of a teenager who was lost after viewing dangerous platform posts argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and suitable for young users," said a leading peer.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, legislation is primarily unfolding at the state government level due to national gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various politicians to mimic Australia's example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Beyond the West, further countries are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this global debate unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.