🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of countries are exploring comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's youth". The policy may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban could be "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to approve a bill raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not create binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a solid foundation," said the MEP driving the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "based on conclusive data".

Last year, interest built behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the family of a teenager who died after being exposed to dangerous online content argues that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and age appropriate for children," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Stateside, action is mostly unfolding at the state level amid national inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law limiting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with extra use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced bills demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to mimic this example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Apart from these regions, other countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, international bodies adopt a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "might backfire". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in safety.

As this international conversation evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less prepared to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.