🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "robbing our kids' youth". A law may be passed soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged the legislature to enact a bill increasing the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a non-binding motion supporting a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a solid starting point," stated a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the administration has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "based on robust research".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. However, the administration committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after viewing disturbing social media material argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are secure and age appropriate for children," stated a influential online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, action is primarily unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional time requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to follow Australia's example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, further states are also taking action.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could backfire". The agency highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve user protection.

While this international discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.