🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are exploring parallel measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our kids' youth". A law could be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the leader has urged lawmakers to approve a law lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the step does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful first step," commented a leading MEP driving the initiative.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "supported by conclusive data".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization established by the loved ones of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful online content argues that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are safe and suitable for minors," stated a influential peer.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further use dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted bills mandating parental consent for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some politicians to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Apart from these regions, further states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in safety.

While this worldwide discussion unfolds, the steps of this nation and others indicate that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for tech companies to self-regulate.