🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our children's youth". The policy may be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to pass a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended parents to prevent their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic motion supporting a ban for minors except if parental consent is provided. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a solid foundation," commented the parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on robust research".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Charities have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the family of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful social media material contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for young users," said a influential peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, action is largely happening at the regional level due to national inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with extra time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from various figures to copy this path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, further countries are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more measured position. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

Even as this global debate continues, the actions of Australia and several other countries indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.