🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are watching closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

In Europe, a growing number of countries are considering parallel bans.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that smartphones and apps are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". The policy is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a law raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for minors unless guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these apps, the step does not create enforceable legislation.

"A strong age limit is a good starting point," said a leading MEP supporting the initiative.

Britain: A Watchful Eye

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but maintaining any policy must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Last year, support built behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Charities have expressed warnings. One foundation set up by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a blanket age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to create tools that are safe and age appropriate for young users," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Approach

Across America, action is primarily unfolding at the local level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill banning under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting minors to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further time requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted measures mandating adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are also considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global organizations strike a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

While this international discussion continues, the policies of this nation and its followers show that governments internationally are no longer content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.