🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are observing closely to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

In Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering parallel measures.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' youth". The policy may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has called on lawmakers to pass a bill increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Dutch government has urged guardians to block their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion calling for a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these apps, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a useful starting point," stated the European lawmaker driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a girl who died after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are secure and suitable for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, action is largely happening at the state level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from various figures to mimic this example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Apart from these regions, other states are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, international agencies strike a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The organization points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this worldwide debate continues, the policies of the Australian government and others indicate that policymakers internationally are no longer willing to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.