🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". A law may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a bill raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory resolution demanding a ban for minors except if guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid first step," said one European lawmaker supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by conclusive data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the topic.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous online content argues that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely unfolding at the local level due to country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law restricting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures mandating adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain individuals to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies take a more measured position. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might backfire". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

As this worldwide discussion continues, the steps of Australia and others indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.