🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban is "an options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on parliament to approve a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these apps, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," said a leading MEP supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "based on robust evidence".

Last year, interest grew behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to harmful online content suggests that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and fit for children," said a leading peer.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah demands parental consent for minors to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra use needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from various politicians to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

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

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies take a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might backfire". The organization points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in safety.

Even as this global debate evolves, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that governments globally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.