The Australian bold action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and guardians are watching intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
The European Momentum
Across Europe, a rising group of countries are exploring parallel measures.
- The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's youth". The policy may be formalized next year.
- The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the AI".
- Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the measures under consideration".
- In The Spanish government, the leader has urged parliament to pass a bill lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
- In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
- The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their youngsters from social media until 15.
At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion demanding a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is provided. Even though it warns of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the move does not create binding law.
"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian supporting the resolution.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach
For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "based on robust research".
Earlier, momentum gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the administration vowed to further research the topic.
Charities have raised apprehensions. One foundation set up by the family of a young person who died after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.
"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for children," said a prominent peer.
The United States: A State-by-State Landscape
In the United States, action is mostly unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of national inaction.
- Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
- Florida has signed a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
- Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra time needing adult consent.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills requiring guardian approval for minors to open social media profiles.
Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to follow Australia's example, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.
Worldwide Outlook
Apart from these regions, other nations are likewise exploring options.
- The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, international agencies take a more cautious position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could backfire". The body points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.
While this international discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and several other countries show that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.
