🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing number of countries are moving toward comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that phones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". The policy could be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to enact a bill increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion demanding a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not establish binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a good starting point," commented the parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "based on robust data".

Previously, interest built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to further research the issue.

Charities have voiced concerns. A prominent charity founded by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering dangerous online content suggests that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when users become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for children," said a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is largely unfolding at the regional level due to national inaction.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating parental consent for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various figures to follow this lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional states are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international organizations strike a more measured stance. Unicef has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

As this global conversation evolves, the steps of Australia and others indicate that states internationally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.