🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising number of countries are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's childhood". A law is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to approve a proposal raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a related step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged guardians to block their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a good foundation," said the European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong data".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the government pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. An organization set up by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to build products and services that are safe and fit for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, action is primarily occurring at the local level due to federal inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law capping minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from various individuals to copy Australia's example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, additional states are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies adopt a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

As this worldwide discussion continues, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.