🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are observing intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Trend

In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our kids' innocence". A law may be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to pass a bill increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a good first step," said a leading MEP behind the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. One foundation founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are safe and fit for children," stated a prominent peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the regional level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a law capping minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills demanding parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from some politicians to mimic the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Apart from the West, additional countries are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this global discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that states around the world are no longer prepared to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.