🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering similar bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' youth". The policy may be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban is "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on parliament to approve a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised parents to block their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is provided. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the move does not enact binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a solid foundation," commented the European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by strong research".

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

Charities have expressed apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering dangerous platform posts suggests that a simple age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for minors," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

Across America, legislation is largely happening at the regional government level due to federal inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with extra time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills demanding parental consent for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to mimic the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Beyond Europe and the US, further countries are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, global organizations strike a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide debate unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.