🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to ban social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and families are monitoring closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to approve a proposal raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a similar move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a solid starting point," commented the parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the government has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust evidence".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. One foundation established by the family of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to disturbing social media material argues that a simple age ban may not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are safe and fit for young users," commented a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the regional level amid national gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law capping teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with extra access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from certain figures to follow this path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, further states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve user protection.

Even as this global debate unfolds, the actions of this nation and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.