🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of states are moving toward similar measures.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and apps are "stealing our kids' innocence". Legislation is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged parliament to pass a law lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic motion supporting a ban for minors except if parental consent is given. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the step does not establish binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," said the European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Earlier, support gathered behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. An organization founded by the family of a girl who died after being exposed to harmful social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are safe and fit for minors," said a influential online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, action is mostly happening at the regional level due to national gridlock.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with extra access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to copy Australia's path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond Europe and the US, further nations are also exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global agencies take a more measured tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans have downsides and "may even backfire". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

While this international debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer content to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.