🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of states are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to pass a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not create binding law.

"A strong age barrier is a solid first step," said the MEP supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, support gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the matter.

Charities have voiced warnings. One foundation established by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering harmful social media material contends that a strict age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create products and services that are secure and suitable for children," commented a influential child protection advocate.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, action is largely happening at the state level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further time needing parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures demanding adult authorization for minors to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain individuals to copy Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other states are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international bodies adopt a more nuanced tone. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

Even as this global discussion evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others show that states globally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.