🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Officials, campaigners, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of countries are considering parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". A law may be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to approve a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged families to block their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is provided. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a solid first step," said a leading MEP behind the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Eye

Across Britain, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong data".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the family of a young person who died after being exposed to harmful platform posts suggests that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and fit for minors," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, action is primarily occurring at the state level amid country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced laws mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some individuals to copy the Australian example, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, further nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve user protection.

While this worldwide discussion evolves, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to self-regulate.