🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a rising number of states are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's youth". The policy is expected to be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban remains "a potential measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to prevent their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a symbolic motion demanding a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is given. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful first step," said one European lawmaker supporting the measure.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the administration committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. A prominent charity established by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering harmful online content argues that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design products and services that are secure and age appropriate for children," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, action is mostly occurring at the regional government level amid country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a law barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws mandating adult authorization for minors to open social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to follow the Australian path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of these regions, additional countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The body highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

As this global debate evolves, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.