🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Movement

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are considering similar restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". Legislation is expected to be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to approve a law lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised families to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement supporting a ban for under-16s except if a parent decides otherwise is given. Although it highlights of the "addictive" design of these services, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a useful foundation," stated one European lawmaker driving the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. An organization founded by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering disturbing online content suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are secure and fit for minors," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely happening at the regional level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a measure barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a rule capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills requiring parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain figures to copy Australia's lead, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Apart from the West, further countries are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies take a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The organization points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

While this international conversation continues, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states around the world are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.