🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a rising number of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our children's childhood". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to pass a law lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid first step," commented one European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "based on robust research".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the state level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures requiring adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain politicians to follow the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of these regions, additional nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations adopt a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The agency notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

While this international discussion continues, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers around the world are increasingly content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.