🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, campaigners, and parents are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Movement

Across Europe, a increasing group of countries are moving toward similar bans.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister arguing that phones and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to enact a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a similar action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for minors unless guardian approval is provided. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," said the parliamentarian behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has not ruled out a future ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any action must be "based on robust evidence".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering dangerous online content argues that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "cliff edge" of exposure when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to design products and services that are safe and fit for children," stated a leading peer.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, regulation is largely unfolding at the state level amid federal inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure barring under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with any further access requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced laws requiring guardian approval for teenagers to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some figures to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Apart from these regions, further states are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, international bodies strike a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The body points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.

While this global debate evolves, the steps of this nation and several other countries indicate that states internationally are increasingly content to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.