🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive action to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and families are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Trend

Across Europe, a increasing number of nations are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and networks are "stealing our kids' youth". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "a potential tools on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked the legislature to approve a bill raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised parents to block their kids from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic statement supporting a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it warns of the "addictive" quality of these services, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age barrier is a solid foundation," said the parliamentarian driving the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the government has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually weakened. Instead, the government pledged to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. An organization established by the loved ones of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are safe and fit for young users," stated a prominent peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, action is largely occurring at the state level due to country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule capping minors to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with additional time dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted bills mandating parental consent for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from various figures to copy Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

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

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies adopt a more cautious stance. Unicef has advised that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

Even as this worldwide debate continues, the policies of this nation and others demonstrate that states internationally are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to self-regulate.