🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that smartphones and apps are "robbing our children's childhood". Legislation could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these services, the move does not establish binding law.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Eye

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "based on conclusive research".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Charities have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who died after viewing harmful online content argues that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, action is mostly unfolding at the state level due to country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed laws requiring guardian approval for minors to set up social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various individuals to mimic Australia's lead, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Apart from the West, further countries are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations take a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "might backfire". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this international conversation unfolds, the actions of this nation and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less willing to wait for platforms to self-regulate.