🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are observing closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are exploring similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our kids' innocence". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to pass a bill raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. Even though it highlights of the "addictive" design of these services, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a good first step," said one MEP supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have expressed concerns. An organization established by the family of a girl who died after being exposed to disturbing platform posts contends that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when users turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and fit for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, legislation is mostly occurring at the local level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra time requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted bills requiring parental consent for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to follow Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, other states are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more cautious stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

As this international conversation unfolds, the steps of Australia and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.