🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, campaigners, and families are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of countries are exploring comparable bans.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "an tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to approve a bill lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended parents to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a useful first step," said one European lawmaker supporting the measure.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Previously, support gathered behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who died after viewing harmful online content suggests that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to create products and services that are safe and suitable for minors," stated a leading child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, regulation is mostly unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra time requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted bills mandating guardian approval for minors to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to follow this example, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, further states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international agencies adopt a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "might backfire". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in safety.

As this global discussion unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states around the world are less and less content to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.