Australia's controversial move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are watching intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.
European Trend
Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are exploring similar measures.
- Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and platforms are "taking away our children's youth". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
- Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
- Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "one of the measures on the table".
- In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to approve a bill raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
- The administration in the Netherlands has recommended families to block their youngsters from social media before 15.
For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is granted. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.
"A clear age barrier is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian behind the resolution.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance
Across Britain, the government has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in conclusive data".
Previously, momentum built behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration pledged to further research the topic.
Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. One foundation established by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing harmful social media material suggests that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens turn 16.
"This ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are appropriate and suitable for young users," said a influential peer.
The US: A Decentralized Picture
In the United States, action is mostly unfolding at the local government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.
- Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
- The state of Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
- Virginia has approved a rule limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media profiles.
Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to mimic this lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.
Global Outlook
Beyond Europe and the US, other countries are likewise taking action.
- Malaysia intends to ban social media for under-16s beginning next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, global bodies strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve safety.
While this international conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers around the world are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.
