🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of countries are moving toward comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation could be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to approve a proposal increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a solid starting point," commented a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. One foundation established by the family of a teenager who was lost after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra access requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating adult authorization for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Outside of these regions, further nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

As this worldwide discussion evolves, the actions of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.