🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a growing group of states are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our kids' youth". The policy may be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to pass a proposal raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not enact binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good first step," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "based on strong research".

Last year, interest built behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government committed to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a leading peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the state government level due to national stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures mandating parental consent for minors to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from some figures to follow Australia's path, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Beyond the West, further countries are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, global organizations adopt a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The agency points out that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

While this worldwide debate unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that policymakers around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.