🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold policy to restrict social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of countries are considering parallel measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' youth". The policy is expected to be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban remains "a potential measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to pass a bill increasing the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic motion calling for a ban for minors unless parental consent is provided. While it warns of the "addictive" nature of these services, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid first step," commented one MEP behind the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any policy must be "supported by strong data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. One foundation set up by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to create platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for children," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, legislation is primarily happening at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional time needing parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted laws demanding parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various figures to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Views

Beyond Europe and the US, additional countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world bodies take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The organization notes that social networks can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that states around the world are less and less content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.