🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are watching intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing number of nations are exploring comparable measures.

• The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have stated that an similar ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged parliament to enact a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has suggested a related action, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is given. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a solid starting point," commented the MEP driving the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing platform posts suggests that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for minors," stated a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Picture

In the United States, legislation is largely occurring at the regional level amid federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law capping minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating guardian approval for minors to create social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some politicians to copy this path, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more cautious stance. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

While this international discussion continues, the actions of this nation and its followers show that governments internationally are no longer willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.