🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward comparable bans.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and platforms are "stealing our children's innocence". The policy could be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "an options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked the legislature to enact a law raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a useful starting point," commented the parliamentarian behind the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in robust data".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for young users," commented a influential peer.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, legislation is mostly occurring at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from various figures to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other nations are similarly considering moves.

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

However, international bodies take a more measured position. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "may even backfire". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

Even as this international debate unfolds, the steps of this nation and several other countries demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less content to wait for the industry to self-regulate.