🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of nations are moving toward similar measures.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our kids' youth". A law could be formalized soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban is "an measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on parliament to approve a bill increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Dutch government has urged guardians to block their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a solid first step," stated one European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "based on robust research".

Last year, support grew behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to design tools that are safe and suitable for children," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the regional government level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping minors to one hour of social media use per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures requiring adult authorization for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to copy this lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional countries are also exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, global bodies adopt a more cautious stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.

Even as this international conversation continues, the steps of this nation and others show that policymakers internationally are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.