🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive policy to ban social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring parallel restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". A law may be formalized next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the user details of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban is "a potential measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to approve a law lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without parental consent is granted. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the move does not create binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a solid starting point," commented one European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any action must be "based on strong evidence".

Earlier, support built behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have voiced warnings. One foundation founded by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," commented a influential child protection advocate.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, legislation is primarily happening at the state government level amid federal inaction.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some figures to follow this lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

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

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies strike a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in safety.

While this global conversation unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers globally are less and less prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.