🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are watching intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are considering similar measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and platforms are "robbing our children's childhood". The policy could be formalized soon.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to pass a proposal lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised parents to prevent their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a good foundation," stated one European lawmaker behind the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "based on strong evidence".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to create products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," commented a influential online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is primarily happening at the regional government level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws requiring adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to mimic the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Beyond these regions, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, international agencies take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this worldwide debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are increasingly willing to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.