🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and networks are "stealing our children's childhood". Legislation may be passed in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a useful first step," said a leading MEP driving the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Last year, support grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government pledged to further research the topic.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful platform posts suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and fit for young users," commented a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the local government level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra time needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced laws requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies adopt a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

While this worldwide discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and its followers indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.