🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are monitoring closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of states are considering similar bans.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister declaring that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to approve a law raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged families to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is granted. While it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful first step," stated one European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Previously, support grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization founded by the relatives of a young person who died after viewing dangerous platform posts argues that a strict age ban may not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely happening at the local government level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law capping minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted measures mandating adult authorization for teenagers to create social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to mimic the Australian lead, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of these regions, additional states are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies adopt a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in safety.

While this international discussion continues, the actions of this nation and several other countries demonstrate that states internationally are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.