🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising number of nations are moving toward similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our kids' innocence". Legislation could be formalized next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to approve a bill raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged families to block their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it highlights of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the step does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a useful first step," said a leading European lawmaker driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in conclusive data".

Previously, support grew behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have raised concerns. An organization founded by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, action is mostly happening at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with any further time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various figures to copy this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, further nations are also taking action.

• The Malaysian government intends to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more measured position. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might backfire". The body notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

While this international conversation evolves, the actions of this nation and several other countries show that states internationally are no longer content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.