🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that smartphones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be enacted next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has asked parliament to enact a proposal raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a good foundation," said a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful social media material argues that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are secure and fit for minors," commented a leading peer.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, legislation is largely occurring at the regional government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.

• Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation capping teenagers to one hour of social media time per day, with extra access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted measures demanding parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some figures to copy the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Outside of these regions, further nations are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies strike a more measured position. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this international debate evolves, the policies of this nation and others indicate that governments globally are no longer prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.