🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

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

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". A law may be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a proposal increasing the legal 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 recommended a related step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended parents to restrict their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory statement calling for a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "supported by conclusive data".

Earlier, interest gathered behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for young users," commented a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

Across America, action is largely happening at the state government level against a backdrop of national gridlock.

• Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding parental consent for teenagers to create social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various politicians to follow Australia's example, a federal ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Outside of these regions, further states are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this worldwide discussion continues, the actions of this nation and others demonstrate that governments around the world are increasingly prepared to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.