🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a rising number of nations are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that phones and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban could be "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to approve a proposal raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is given. Although it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a useful first step," commented one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any decision must be "grounded in strong research".

Earlier, support gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. One foundation set up by the family of a teenager who died after encountering harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for children," said a prominent peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the regional government level amid country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a measure prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring adult authorization for minors to set up social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from various politicians to copy the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, other countries are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations strike a more cautious position. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

As this global discussion unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.