🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this approach will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of countries are moving toward parallel measures.

• The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to approve a law raising the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised parents to prevent 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 supporting a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. While it warns of the "addictive" quality of these services, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"An effective age limit is a good first step," stated a leading MEP behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust data".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing harmful online content contends that a strict age ban might not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to create platforms and apps that are secure and fit for young users," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely happening at the regional level due to country-wide gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation restricting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding parental consent for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to copy Australia's path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

Apart from the West, further states are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more cautious position. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to improve user protection.

As this international discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.