🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

The European Movement

Across Europe, a rising chorus of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that smartphones and networks are "stealing our kids' innocence". A law may be passed soon.
• Norway is set to implement a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "an tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has called on lawmakers to pass a law increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a comparable action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised families to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not establish binding law.

"An effective age limit is a solid first step," commented a leading parliamentarian driving the measure.

The UK: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "based on strong evidence".

Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government pledged to further research the issue.

Charities have voiced concerns. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after viewing disturbing platform posts suggests that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent peer.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

In the United States, regulation is largely occurring at the regional government level amid country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from certain politicians to mimic the Australian example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, additional nations are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might backfire". The organization notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

While this worldwide conversation evolves, the steps of Australia and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.