🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing number of states are exploring similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". Legislation may be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has called on lawmakers to enact a law increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for under-16s without parental consent is given. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid starting point," commented one MEP driving the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in robust data".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. An organization founded by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, action is largely occurring at the state level due to national stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise passed laws demanding adult authorization for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from certain individuals to mimic this lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, other states are also taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, global organizations adopt a more cautious stance. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

As this international discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.