🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing number of nations are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister declaring that phones and networks are "taking away our kids' childhood". A law could be formalized next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban could be "one of the measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to enact a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a related step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a good first step," commented one European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Previously, support gathered behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is largely occurring at the local government level amid federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted measures requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Beyond the West, further countries are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, international bodies take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that governments around the world are less and less content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.