🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are moving toward similar measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' youth". A law may be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on the legislature to approve a law raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable move, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a advisory resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is given. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a good first step," commented a leading European lawmaker driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "based on strong evidence".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Charities have raised concerns. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering dangerous online content contends that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are safe and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional government level due to federal inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law capping teenagers to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures requiring adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain politicians to mimic the Australian example, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, further countries are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies adopt a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The agency points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

Even as this international conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and others show that policymakers globally are increasingly willing to delay for the industry to make changes on their own.