🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring parallel bans.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". A law is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked parliament to pass a law raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a comparable action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged guardians to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a useful foundation," said one parliamentarian driving the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Eye

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "supported by robust evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous social media material suggests that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are safe and fit for children," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, regulation is primarily unfolding at the regional level amid federal inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced laws requiring parental consent for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from some politicians to follow this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, additional nations are also exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

Even as this global discussion unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer content to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.