🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to restrict social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are moving toward similar measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' youth". Legislation may be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to pass a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar move, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion calling for a ban for minors without parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a useful first step," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a potential ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. An organization set up by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to build products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," stated a influential peer.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the state level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law capping teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to open social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to copy this example, a federal ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are also considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies adopt a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The agency points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

As this worldwide discussion unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and its followers show that states globally are less and less content to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.