🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are considering comparable restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that phones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". A law may be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to approve a bill raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to block their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a non-binding motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not enact binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a useful first step," commented one European lawmaker driving the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong data".

Last year, support built behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the government committed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who died after encountering harmful social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for young users," said a influential peer.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, legislation is mostly unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule capping minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures mandating adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from some figures to follow the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from these regions, further countries are also exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world organizations take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

Even as this international debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and others show that states internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to self-regulate.