The Australian controversial move to restrict social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.
The European Movement
In Europe, a rising group of nations are considering parallel bans.
- Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation could be passed soon.
- Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
- Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "a potential options on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged the legislature to pass a law lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In The French government, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a related move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
- The government in the Netherlands has advised families to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a advisory resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "addictive" nature of these services, the step does not establish binding law.
"An effective age limit is a solid first step," said the MEP behind the initiative.
The UK: A Cautious Stance
In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong evidence".
Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. However, the administration committed to further research the matter.
Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people reach the legal age.
"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build products and services that are safe and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent peer.
The US: A Decentralized Approach
Across America, action is mostly happening at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.
- Utah requires adult approval for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
- Florida has enacted a law prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
- Virginia has enacted a rule restricting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra time needing adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring guardian approval for minors to create social media accounts.
Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain individuals to follow Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
Global Views
Beyond these regions, other states are similarly taking action.
- The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
- Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.
But, global organizations strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could prove counterproductive". The organization points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.
As this worldwide conversation evolves, the policies of this nation and its followers demonstrate that states globally are less and less willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.
