🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing group of countries are considering parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and apps are "taking away our children's innocence". A law is expected to be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to approve a bill lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a non-binding statement calling for a ban for minors except if parental consent is granted. Even though it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these services, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a good first step," said one European lawmaker driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after viewing harmful social media material contends that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for children," commented a influential online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is largely happening at the state government level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with extra use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed measures requiring guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various individuals to copy the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world agencies take a more measured position. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even backfire". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

Even as this international debate unfolds, the steps of Australia and its followers demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.