🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive policy to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a increasing number of countries are exploring similar bans.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' youth". The policy is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential tools on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to approve a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has suggested a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful first step," stated the European lawmaker driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a future ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any decision must be "based on robust data".

Last year, interest grew behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised warnings. An organization established by the relatives of a young person who died after viewing harmful platform posts argues that a simple age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are appropriate and fit for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, regulation is primarily unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning under-14s from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted bills demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to mimic this path, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond these regions, additional states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, international organizations adopt a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might backfire". The body highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide debate evolves, the actions of this nation and others indicate that governments globally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.