🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing number of countries are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our kids' childhood". The policy is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an similar ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to approve a proposal raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has recommended a comparable move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is granted. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid foundation," said a leading European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the government has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "based on strong evidence".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was in the end modified. Nonetheless, the administration committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a girl who died after encountering disturbing online content argues that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and fit for minors," stated a prominent peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Picture

Stateside, action is mostly happening at the regional level due to country-wide inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills mandating guardian approval for under-16s to create social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from some individuals to follow Australia's path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Apart from the West, further states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more cautious stance. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

As this global debate continues, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that governments globally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.