🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to restrict social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a increasing group of states are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "influence of the AI".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban remains "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to pass a bill raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a advisory motion demanding a ban for under-16s except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age barrier is a useful starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, support built behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. However, the administration vowed to further research the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when young people turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are secure and fit for children," stated a leading peer.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

Across America, action is primarily unfolding at the state government level amid country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from various politicians to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Outlook

Apart from these regions, additional nations are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international agencies take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.

While this worldwide debate continues, the policies of this nation and its followers demonstrate that policymakers globally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.