🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing closely to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are exploring comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory motion calling for a ban for minors except if guardian approval is given. Even though it warns of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a good starting point," commented a leading MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the administration has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Charities have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the family of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to harmful platform posts contends that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when users become eligible.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are secure and fit for children," commented a influential peer.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is largely unfolding at the regional level amid country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to create social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain politicians to mimic Australia's path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Outside of the West, other nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

However, international bodies take a more measured tone. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve user protection.

Even as this global debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that states around the world are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.