🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of nations are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our kids' childhood". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to enact a proposal raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. While it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," said a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "supported by robust research".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. One foundation founded by the relatives of a young person who was lost after encountering disturbing online content argues that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are safe and suitable for children," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is mostly occurring at the local level due to national stalemate.

• Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed bills mandating guardian approval for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to follow the Australian path, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Outside of the West, other states are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this global discussion continues, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries demonstrate that states internationally are no longer prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.