🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are observing intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a rising chorus of countries are considering comparable measures.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that phones and platforms are "stealing our children's youth". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked the legislature to pass a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has urged guardians to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a advisory statement supporting a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. While it warns of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a good first step," stated the MEP driving the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. However, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. One foundation established by the loved ones of a teenager who died after encountering harmful platform posts argues that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is primarily happening at the state government level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation capping under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to copy this example, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, other nations are also taking action.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

But, international organizations strike a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

As this worldwide debate unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for the industry to make changes on their own.