🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the user details of social media users. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "an options under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to pass a proposal lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a related action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age limit is a useful foundation," stated one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "based on conclusive research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who died after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to build tools that are appropriate and suitable for children," said a prominent peer.

America: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the state level amid federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional access requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring parental consent for minors to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various figures to follow this example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, other countries are likewise taking action.

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

But, global organizations take a more measured tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this international conversation evolves, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries show that governments globally are less and less prepared to wait for the industry to self-regulate.