🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are considering similar restrictions.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our youngsters' youth". A law could be passed next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media users. Officials have suggested that an similar ban could be "a potential options under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on the legislature to approve a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a similar move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"A clear age restriction is a good starting point," stated a leading European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "based on robust data".

Earlier, momentum grew behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to further research the issue.

Charities have raised apprehensions. One foundation founded by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when teens become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to create products and services that are safe and suitable for young users," said a influential peer.

America: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, action is mostly occurring at the regional government level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a rule restricting under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some figures to copy Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond these regions, further countries are similarly considering moves.

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies adopt a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this international conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that states globally are less and less content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.