🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising group of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". A law is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to approve a law raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if parental consent is given. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a useful first step," said one parliamentarian behind the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "based on strong evidence".

Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and fit for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the state level due to federal inaction.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain politicians to copy this lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

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

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

While this global debate continues, the steps of Australia and others indicate that states around the world are increasingly content to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.