The Australian controversial move to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.
Across Europe Trend
Across Europe, a growing group of countries are exploring similar restrictions.
- Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our youngsters' youth". A law could be formalized in the coming year.
- Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
- The Irish government is introducing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools on the table".
- In Spain, the prime minister has asked parliament to enact a law increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The authorities in The Dutch government has urged parents to prevent their kids from social media before 15.
For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.
"An effective age barrier is a useful first step," commented the European lawmaker driving the resolution.
Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance
In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in conclusive data".
Last year, support grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. However, the administration committed to conduct more studies the issue.
Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the loved ones of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous online content argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when users become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a leading child protection advocate.
The US: A State-by-State Approach
Stateside, action is mostly occurring at the local level amid federal gridlock.
- Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
- The state of Florida has signed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
- The state of Virginia has approved a law capping minors to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media profiles.
Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to copy Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.
International Outlook
Beyond these regions, further countries are likewise taking action.
- The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
- Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.
However, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that social media bans pose dangers and "could backfire". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.
As this global discussion evolves, the policies of Australia and its followers indicate that governments internationally are less and less content to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.
