🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and families are monitoring closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising number of states are moving toward similar bans.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law is expected to be passed soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential options in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to approve a law lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended families to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is given. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" design of these apps, the step does not establish binding law.

"A clear age restriction is a solid first step," commented one MEP driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "based on conclusive research".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have voiced warnings. An organization established by the family of a girl who died after viewing harmful platform posts argues that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," commented a leading peer.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, action is largely happening at the state government level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted bills requiring parental consent for minors to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some individuals to mimic this example, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Views

Outside of the West, further nations are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, global organizations strike a more cautious stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even backfire". The body points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve safety.

While this international conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers globally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.