🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

European Trend

Throughout Europe, a rising group of countries are exploring comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's childhood". The policy may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban remains "one of the options on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged parliament to enact a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised parents to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a advisory resolution calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a useful starting point," said the MEP supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Previously, support built behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to investigate the issue.

Charities have voiced warnings. A prominent charity established by the family of a young person who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create tools that are secure and suitable for minors," commented a influential peer.

America: A Decentralized Approach

In the United States, regulation is primarily happening at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further access needing parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted laws mandating parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Global Perspectives

Beyond these regions, additional countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, international bodies take a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

Even as this global debate continues, the policies of the Australian government and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.