🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

In Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban could be "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to pass a proposal increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for minors unless parental consent is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

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

Britain: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "supported by conclusive research".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have raised concerns. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who was lost after viewing harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design products and services that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is mostly occurring at the local level due to national inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed laws requiring guardian approval for teenagers to open social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from various individuals to copy Australia's path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, further countries are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, world agencies take a more measured tone. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

As this worldwide debate continues, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for the industry to make changes on their own.