🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.

European Trend

In Europe, a increasing number of countries are moving toward comparable restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that phones and platforms are "robbing our children's youth". The policy may be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban is "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to enact a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a similar move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has approved a advisory motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these services, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a solid first step," commented one European lawmaker driving the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Charities have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who took her own life after viewing disturbing social media material contends that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," said a influential child protection advocate.

America: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, action is mostly unfolding at the local government level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra access needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to mimic Australia's example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, further states are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

But, world agencies adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in safety.

Even as this global debate evolves, the policies of this nation and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.