🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold action to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are watching intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are considering parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". The policy is expected to be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media participants. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban is "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to enact a law raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic resolution supporting a ban for minors without parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age limit is a solid first step," said a leading European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the government pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. One foundation established by the family of a girl who died after being exposed to disturbing platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the failure of the social media companies to build products and services that are secure and age appropriate for young users," said a prominent peer.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, legislation is mostly occurring at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional access needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws mandating parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from various politicians to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Beyond the West, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations strike a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The body notes that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

As this worldwide discussion unfolds, the actions of Australia and several other countries indicate that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.