🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are monitoring intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of countries are exploring similar restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an similar ban remains "one of the options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to pass a proposal increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to block their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is given. Although it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," stated a leading European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust research".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. However, the government vowed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," said a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is largely occurring at the local level due to national inaction.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with any further time needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed bills mandating adult authorization for under-16s to create social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some individuals to copy this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional nations are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve safety.

While this global conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and several other countries show that policymakers around the world are increasingly content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.