🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a rising number of states are exploring comparable measures.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and platforms are "taking away our children's youth". A law is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. While it cautions of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a useful starting point," commented one parliamentarian behind the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in robust research".

Earlier, support grew behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have voiced concerns. A prominent charity founded by the family of a teenager who died after being exposed to harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for children," commented a influential peer.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, action is mostly occurring at the state level amid federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further time needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws mandating adult authorization for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from some individuals to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other nations are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

However, global bodies strike a more measured position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

As this worldwide conversation continues, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.