🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing group of nations are considering parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that smartphones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' youth". A law may be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to pass a bill raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian behind the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong research".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Instead, the government vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a young person who died after viewing disturbing social media material argues that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for children," said a prominent peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the state level amid national inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed measures demanding parental consent for teenagers to open social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain individuals to copy this example, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Beyond Europe and the US, other nations are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world organizations strike a more measured position. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even backfire". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

As this international discussion continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that governments around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.