Australia's bold action to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.
European Movement
Across Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring similar measures.
- The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be passed next year.
- The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
- Ireland is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "one of the options under consideration".
- In The Spanish government, the leader has urged parliament to approve a law lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
- In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
- The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended parents to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a non-binding motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is given. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.
"A strong age restriction is a solid first step," said one European lawmaker driving the initiative.
The UK: A Cautious Approach
Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "supported by conclusive research".
Earlier, interest grew behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the administration committed to further research the topic.
Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing online content argues that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a leading peer.
America: A Fragmented Landscape
In the United States, regulation is mostly occurring at the local level due to national inaction.
- Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
- Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
- Virginia has passed a rule limiting under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with extra access needing adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted measures requiring guardian approval for minors to open social media accounts.
Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain individuals to copy this path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.
Worldwide Views
Outside of the West, other countries are likewise considering moves.
- Malaysia intends to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
- Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.
But, international bodies take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize safety.
Even as this worldwide debate continues, the actions of this nation and several other countries indicate that governments globally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.
