🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising number of nations are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". A law could be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has asked lawmakers to pass a law raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a advisory resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is given. Although it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these apps, the step does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a solid first step," said the MEP behind the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Eye

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by conclusive research".

Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing online content contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely occurring at the state level amid federal stalemate.

• Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to mimic this path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Views

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

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

But, international organizations take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "could backfire". The body points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this international debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states globally are less and less willing to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.