🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are watching intently to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked parliament to approve a bill increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged families to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on robust research".

Last year, momentum grew behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. However, the administration committed to investigate the matter.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering harmful social media material contends that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, regulation is primarily unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with any further access requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain politicians to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Apart from the West, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies strike a more measured tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even backfire". The organization points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

While this worldwide discussion continues, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that governments globally are increasingly willing to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.