🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are watching intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a rising number of nations are considering parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that phones and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". A law could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have indicated that an similar ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to pass a law raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a useful foundation," stated one MEP driving the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the issue.

Charities have voiced concerns. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who died after encountering disturbing online content contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when users turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and suitable for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Picture

Across America, action is primarily unfolding at the local government level amid country-wide inaction.

• Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a rule restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from some figures to follow the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Apart from the West, further states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations strike a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in safety.

Even as this global discussion continues, the actions of this nation and its followers indicate that governments globally are no longer willing to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.