🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a growing chorus of countries are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our kids' innocence". A law may be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "a potential tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged parliament to enact a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended parents to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," stated a leading parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any decision must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to further research the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. A prominent charity founded by the family of a teenager who died after encountering harmful social media material argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah demands guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional time needing parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted measures requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain politicians to follow this example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Beyond Europe and the US, other states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies take a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might backfire". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

As this international discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and several other countries show that governments globally are less and less content to delay for the industry to self-regulate.