🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to ban social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

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

• The Danish government has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be enacted soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to pass a bill raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised parents to prevent their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is given. Even though it warns of the "addictive" nature of these services, the move does not enact mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a good starting point," stated the European lawmaker driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in strong data".

Previously, interest built behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Charities have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are safe and suitable for children," said a leading peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, regulation is primarily occurring at the local level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has signed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law capping under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with extra access requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to open social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to mimic this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Apart from the West, further nations are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations strike a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this global conversation evolves, the policies of Australia and its followers show that governments internationally are no longer content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.