🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold move to ban social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". Legislation may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "a potential tools on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has recommended a related action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to block their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a good first step," said a leading European lawmaker driving the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the government has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "based on conclusive data".

Last year, support gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the issue.

Charities have expressed warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to harmful social media material argues that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and age appropriate for young users," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, regulation is mostly unfolding at the regional level amid federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a law capping minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring guardian approval for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various individuals to copy this lead, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Apart from the West, other countries are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global organizations strike a more nuanced position. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "may even backfire". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide discussion unfolds, the policies of this nation and its followers indicate that governments internationally are increasingly willing to delay for the industry to make changes on their own.