🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of nations are considering comparable measures.

• The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has called on lawmakers to enact a bill lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian driving the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "based on strong evidence".

Earlier, interest grew behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous online content suggests that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for young users," said a prominent peer.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, legislation is largely happening at the state level due to federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures mandating guardian approval for minors to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to copy the Australian example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise exploring options.

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

However, international bodies take a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this international conversation unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states globally are less and less willing to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.