🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are watching closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

European Trend

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward similar measures.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and apps are "robbing our children's childhood". The policy is expected to be formalized next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the options on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to enact a bill increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a similar action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is given. Even though it highlights of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian behind the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on conclusive data".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the government pledged to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering disturbing online content contends that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for young users," stated a prominent peer.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, legislation is mostly happening at the state government level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a regulation limiting teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring guardian approval for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various politicians to follow this example, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Outside of these regions, further countries are also exploring options.

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

But, world bodies take a more cautious tone. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The body points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to invest in safety.

Even as this global debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries indicate that states internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.