🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive move to ban social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a growing number of nations are considering parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and apps are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban is "a potential measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to enact a bill lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a symbolic statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a useful first step," said one parliamentarian behind the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust data".

Previously, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. An organization set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after being exposed to harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are appropriate and suitable for young users," stated a leading peer.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, legislation is primarily happening at the local level due to federal inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further time requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to copy the Australian example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Apart from the West, further nations are also taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, international agencies strike a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

While this global discussion evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that governments internationally are increasingly content to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.