🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to ban social media access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are considering similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that phones and platforms are "robbing our kids' youth". A law may be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an similar ban is "an tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to pass a proposal raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if a parent decides otherwise is given. While it highlights of the "addictive" design of these apps, the step does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a useful foundation," stated the parliamentarian driving the initiative.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, support built behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government committed to further research the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and fit for minors," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, legislation is largely occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with extra use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some politicians to follow this lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional nations are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world bodies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could prove counterproductive". The organization points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this worldwide debate unfolds, the actions of Australia and others show that states globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.