🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are watching intently to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward parallel measures.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation may be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to pass a proposal lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s unless a parent decides otherwise is given. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a solid first step," stated the European lawmaker behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in strong data".

Earlier, support gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised concerns. An organization set up by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for children," said a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is primarily happening at the local level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule restricting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with any further access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted bills mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to follow the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, additional nations are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies adopt a more nuanced position. Unicef has warned that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The organization notes that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in safety.

As this international conversation unfolds, the policies of this nation and others indicate that states globally are no longer willing to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.