🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive policy to ban social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of nations are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation may be passed soon.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to pass a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised parents to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a non-binding statement demanding a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid foundation," commented one parliamentarian behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Last year, support grew behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government pledged to further research the matter.

Charities have raised warnings. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and fit for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly occurring at the state level amid national stalemate.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills demanding guardian approval for teenagers to create social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from some politicians to mimic Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Outside of the West, further nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, global agencies adopt a more nuanced position. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this global discussion unfolds, the actions of Australia and its followers show that states internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.