🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to ban social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are watching intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

In Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that phones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' childhood". A law could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban is "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on the legislature to enact a bill raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic statement demanding a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it warns of the "addictive" design of these apps, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," said a leading European lawmaker driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "based on conclusive research".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after viewing disturbing social media material contends that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to build tools that are safe and suitable for children," stated a leading peer.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the state government level amid federal inaction.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a measure barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills mandating guardian approval for minors to create social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain individuals to copy Australia's example, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Apart from the West, further countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this global conversation unfolds, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that governments globally are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.