🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing group of states are exploring comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "stealing our youngsters' youth". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Officials have stated that an similar ban could be "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has called on the legislature to pass a bill lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended families to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is provided. Even though it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age barrier is a useful foundation," said one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "grounded in strong research".

Last year, support built behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a young person who was lost after being exposed to dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a influential peer.

America: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, action is primarily unfolding at the state government level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a regulation capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise passed laws mandating parental consent for minors to open social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and calls from various politicians to mimic this path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Beyond Europe and the US, other states are also exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies take a more measured stance. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could backfire". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.

As this global discussion continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that governments internationally are no longer prepared to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.