Australia's bold move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.
Across Europe Movement
In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering comparable restrictions.
- Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be enacted in the coming year.
- The Norwegian government is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "power of the AI".
- The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "an options in reserve".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on the legislature to enact a law raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
- In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The government in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.
"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," commented one MEP behind the measure.
Britain: A Cautious Approach
For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but stressing any action must be "grounded in robust data".
Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the matter.
Charities have expressed warnings. An organization founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing social media material contends that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.
"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent peer.
The United States: A Decentralized Approach
Stateside, action is mostly unfolding at the local level due to country-wide gridlock.
- Utah mandates parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
- Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
- The state of Virginia has enacted a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further time requiring adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced laws mandating guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.
Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various figures to follow Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.
Global Views
Outside of these regions, other states are also exploring options.
- Malaysia intends to restrict social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.
But, international agencies take a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even backfire". The organization points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve safety.
While this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries show that governments internationally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.
