🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a increasing number of nations are moving toward similar bans.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that phones and platforms are "robbing our kids' childhood". Legislation may be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "an tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to approve a proposal raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a advisory motion demanding a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. While it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful foundation," said a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Watchful Approach

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Last year, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a girl who died after viewing disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build tools that are safe and fit for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, legislation is largely unfolding at the local government level against a backdrop of national gridlock.

• Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a law restricting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with additional time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced laws requiring adult authorization for minors to create social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some figures to mimic Australia's path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Apart from the West, further nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies adopt a more cautious stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization points out that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and its followers demonstrate that states internationally are no longer willing to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.