🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

The European Trend

In Europe, a increasing chorus of states are considering comparable measures.

• The Danish government plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' youth". Legislation may be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a law raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is given. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.

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

The UK: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust data".

Earlier, interest built behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government committed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to design tools that are safe and age appropriate for children," said a prominent child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, action is largely happening at the state level amid federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule capping minors to one hour of social media time per day, with any further access requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced laws demanding adult authorization for minors to create social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from certain figures to mimic Australia's lead, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Beyond Europe and the US, additional nations are likewise taking action.

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

But, international organizations take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could backfire". The agency highlights that social networks can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

Even as this international conversation continues, the steps of this nation and its followers demonstrate that policymakers around the world are no longer prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.