Australia's bold action to ban social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
Across Europe Momentum
In Europe, a rising number of countries are considering comparable measures.
- The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that phones and platforms are "taking away our kids' innocence". A law is expected to be passed next year.
- Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "power of the algorithms".
- Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media participants. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential tools under consideration".
- In Spain, the president has called on the legislature to enact a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related action, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
- The authorities in The Netherlands has advised parents to block their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a symbolic statement demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. Even though it warns of the "addictive" nature of these apps, the move does not enact mandatory rules.
"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," stated a leading parliamentarian behind the resolution.
Britain: A Watchful Eye
In the UK, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in conclusive research".
Last year, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government vowed to conduct more studies the matter.
Campaign organizations have raised warnings. A prominent charity set up by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a reaction to the failure of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are safe and suitable for children," stated a leading peer.
The United States: A Decentralized Landscape
Across America, action is largely happening at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.
- Utah mandates parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
- Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
- Virginia has enacted a rule limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring parental consent for minors to create social media profiles.
Even with widespread concern and calls from various individuals to mimic the Australian lead, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.
International Perspectives
Outside of the West, additional nations are likewise considering moves.
- The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.
Yet, world organizations adopt a more measured tone. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve safety.
While this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less content to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.
