🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing group of countries are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to pass a law increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a useful starting point," stated one MEP driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration pledged to further research the matter.

Charities have expressed warnings. A prominent charity established by the family of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to build tools that are safe and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, action is largely unfolding at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed bills demanding parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to follow this lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of these regions, further nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, world agencies strike a more nuanced tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even backfire". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

While this global discussion unfolds, the actions of Australia and its followers indicate that states around the world are less and less willing to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.