🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, safety advocates, and families are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a growing number of nations are exploring parallel restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader stating that smartphones and networks are "robbing our kids' youth". The policy may be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has called on parliament to pass a bill lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to block their children from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution supporting a ban for minors unless parental consent is given. While it cautions of the "addictive" design of these services, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A clear age restriction is a useful starting point," stated a leading MEP behind the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the administration has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any action must be "supported by robust data".

Previously, support gathered behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the matter.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. An organization set up by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after viewing disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and suitable for children," commented a leading peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, action is primarily unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule restricting under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use dependent on adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating guardian approval for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to follow the Australian path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, additional nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, global agencies take a more nuanced position. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "may even backfire". The organization points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

While this global discussion evolves, the actions of this nation and its followers show that states internationally are no longer content to wait for the industry to make changes on their own.