🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to ban social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing number of countries are considering comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". The policy is expected to be formalized soon.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to enact a law lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good first step," stated a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Last year, interest built behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have voiced concerns. One foundation established by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to harmful online content argues that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to create tools that are secure and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, legislation is mostly unfolding at the regional level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah demands guardian permission for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further time dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced bills demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain politicians to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of these regions, further states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, global agencies take a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might backfire". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve safety.

As this international debate unfolds, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to self-regulate.