🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are watching closely to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

The European Trend

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that phones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation could be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "one of the measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on the legislature to pass a bill raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a related move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for minors unless guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a good first step," said a leading European lawmaker driving the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. However, the government committed to further research the matter.

Charities have raised warnings. An organization founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are safe and fit for children," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the state level due to country-wide inaction.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with extra time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from the West, further countries are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world organizations take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize user protection.

While this worldwide conversation unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.