🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of states are considering comparable bans.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister stating that phones and apps are "stealing our children's childhood". A law could be formalized in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is set to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory statement demanding a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Earlier, support built behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the government pledged to further research the topic.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a teenager who died after being exposed to disturbing platform posts contends that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and suitable for young users," said a influential peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further access dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and calls from some politicians to mimic this path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, further nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, international agencies adopt a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might backfire". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide discussion unfolds, the policies of this nation and its followers show that governments around the world are no longer prepared to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.