🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Trend

In Europe, a increasing group of countries are exploring similar measures.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's youth". A law is expected to be formalized soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked parliament to pass a law raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a non-binding statement demanding a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these apps, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A clear age limit is a good foundation," commented a leading parliamentarian driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Last year, support gathered behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the government committed to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. One foundation set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing dangerous social media material argues that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and fit for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, action is primarily happening at the local government level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with any further use dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills requiring parental consent for minors to set up social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from various individuals to follow this example, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

Apart from the West, other states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, international bodies take a more cautious stance. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "could backfire". The organization notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to improve child safeguards.

As this global conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and its followers show that governments around the world are less and less prepared to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.