The Australian controversial move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for other nations.
Across Europe Movement
Throughout Europe, a increasing number of countries are considering parallel bans.
- The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister stating that phones and apps are "stealing our children's youth". A law may be enacted next year.
- Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "power of the algorithms".
- The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "a potential options in reserve".
- In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to enact a law lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar action, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
- The administration in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to block their children from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. Although it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the step does not create enforceable legislation.
"A strong age barrier is a useful starting point," stated the MEP supporting the resolution.
Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance
For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong research".
Last year, interest grew behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.
Campaign organizations have expressed warnings. An organization established by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing disturbing social media material argues that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a leading child protection advocate.
The US: A Fragmented Picture
Across America, legislation is mostly occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of national inaction.
- Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
- The state of Florida has signed a measure prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
- The state of Virginia has passed a law capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra access needing a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills demanding guardian approval for teenagers to create social media accounts.
Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from some politicians to mimic this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.
International Views
Outside of the West, other countries are likewise taking action.
- Malaysia plans to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- Brazil has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, world bodies adopt a more measured stance. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in safety.
Even as this global debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that states globally are less and less willing to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.
