🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are exploring comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to approve a proposal increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it warns of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful foundation," commented one MEP driving the measure.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "based on strong data".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Charities have raised warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a young person who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are secure and suitable for young users," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

Across America, action is primarily unfolding at the regional level amid country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a rule limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills demanding adult authorization for under-16s to create social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain politicians to follow the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, world agencies strike a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The body notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to invest in child safeguards.

As this global debate evolves, the steps of this nation and several other countries demonstrate that states globally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.