🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of countries are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that phones and platforms are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Officials have indicated that an similar ban is "a potential options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has asked parliament to approve a law lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a advisory statement calling for a ban for minors except if guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a good starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "supported by robust research".

Last year, momentum built behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the government vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have voiced warnings. A prominent charity established by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a leading child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, action is mostly unfolding at the state government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• The state of Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from some individuals to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Beyond Europe and the US, additional countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies take a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

While this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.