🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing number of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". A law is expected to be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to enact a proposal increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged parents to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a advisory motion demanding a ban for minors without guardian approval is given. Although it highlights of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," stated a leading MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "based on strong evidence".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have voiced concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for children," said a influential peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, legislation is mostly occurring at the local level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a law restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further use needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some individuals to follow this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Outside of the West, further states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, world bodies adopt a more measured position. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even backfire". The body highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

While this international discussion evolves, the steps of this nation and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers globally are increasingly willing to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.