🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a growing number of countries are exploring parallel measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation is expected to be formalized soon.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on lawmakers to pass a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged families to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a advisory motion calling for a ban for under-16s unless guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age limit is a solid starting point," said a leading MEP behind the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by robust data".

Previously, support gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. However, the government vowed to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to build products and services that are safe and fit for children," said a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, regulation is primarily occurring at the state level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from some politicians to copy Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, other countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, global agencies adopt a more measured stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body points out that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve safety.

Even as this international conversation continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers around the world are no longer willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.