🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold move to ban social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are observing closely to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of states are considering similar restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that smartphones and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to enact a bill lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it cautions of the "compulsive" design of these services, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a good foundation," said the MEP driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any action must be "supported by strong research".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, action is mostly happening at the local level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain figures to mimic this example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond the West, other nations are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global agencies strike a more nuanced stance. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The body notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

While this international conversation unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others show that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.