🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and families are watching closely to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' innocence". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on lawmakers to enact a proposal lifting the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a comparable move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised families to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion supporting a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a good starting point," commented a leading parliamentarian behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, support built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. However, the government committed to investigate the issue.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. An organization founded by the loved ones of a girl who died after encountering disturbing platform posts suggests that a simple age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and suitable for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, legislation is primarily occurring at the local level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws mandating parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and calls from certain figures to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Beyond these regions, other nations are also considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

However, global agencies take a more cautious stance. The UN children's agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might backfire". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for isolated youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this worldwide debate evolves, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that states internationally are less and less content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.