🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of countries are considering similar bans.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our kids' youth". A law may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the user details of social media users. The media minister have stated that an similar ban could be "an options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a advisory statement supporting a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," said one MEP behind the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a possible ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in robust data".

Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the government pledged to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the family of a young person who died after being exposed to harmful online content argues that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when young people become eligible.

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

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, action is largely unfolding at the local level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a law capping teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted laws requiring adult authorization for minors to create social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some figures to follow Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional nations are also exploring options.

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

But, world bodies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The organization notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve user protection.

Even as this worldwide discussion continues, the policies of Australia and its followers indicate that states globally are no longer prepared to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.