🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". The policy is expected to be enacted soon.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to enact a bill increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a advisory resolution calling for a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the move does not create binding law.

"An effective age limit is a good foundation," said one MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Previously, support gathered behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government committed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. One foundation established by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing platform posts suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to build tools that are safe and suitable for young users," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional level amid federal inaction.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a law restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with any further time requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced bills demanding parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from some individuals to copy the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of these regions, further states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies take a more measured position. Unicef has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

As this global debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states globally are increasingly willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.