🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising number of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to pass a law lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a related action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is given. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," stated one European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in conclusive data".

Earlier, support gathered behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for minors," said a prominent peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the local level amid country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced bills mandating guardian approval for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from certain individuals to mimic Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Beyond these regions, additional nations are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international agencies take a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

Even as this worldwide debate evolves, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that states globally are less and less content to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.