🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of countries are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban is "an options in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked parliament to pass a proposal lifting the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a advisory motion supporting a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a good first step," commented the European lawmaker driving the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after viewing harmful platform posts contends that a simple age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for children," commented a leading child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, action is largely happening at the regional government level due to national gridlock.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a law restricting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced bills requiring parental consent for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from some politicians to follow the Australian lead, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, other nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global agencies take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide conversation unfolds, the steps of this nation and others demonstrate that states globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.