🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold move to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing group of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that phones and apps are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on the legislature to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory motion calling for a ban for minors unless parental consent is granted. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," said the European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a future ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by conclusive data".

Previously, interest grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization set up by the loved ones of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a leading peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly happening at the state level due to country-wide gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation capping minors to one hour of social media access per day, with any further time dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills mandating adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain politicians to copy the Australian lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Apart from the West, further countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world agencies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "could backfire". The body notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve safety.

While this international conversation unfolds, the steps of Australia and others show that governments globally are no longer prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.