🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to restrict social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are observing intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". The policy is expected to be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged parliament to approve a law raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," said the European lawmaker behind the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by strong data".

Earlier, interest built behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after viewing harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the state level amid national stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted measures demanding parental consent for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Views

Apart from Europe and the US, further states are also exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, international bodies strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

Even as this global discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and several other countries indicate that states globally are increasingly willing to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.