Australia's bold move to ban social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.
The European Movement
Throughout Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring parallel bans.
- The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our children's innocence". A law could be passed next year.
- Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
- Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
- In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to enact a bill raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The authorities in The Dutch government has urged parents to restrict their children from social media before 15.
At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.
"An effective age restriction is a solid foundation," said the parliamentarian driving the resolution.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach
Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".
Previously, support grew behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.
Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users become eligible.
"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to design tools that are safe and suitable for children," commented a influential peer.
America: A Decentralized Landscape
Across America, regulation is primarily occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock.
- Utah demands adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
- Florida has passed a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra access requiring a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced measures requiring parental consent for minors to open social media accounts.
Even with cross-party agreement and calls from some politicians to copy the Australian path, a federal ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.
Global Views
Outside of these regions, other nations are likewise exploring options.
- Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "may even prove counterproductive". The organization points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.
While this global discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less willing to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.