🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of nations are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister arguing that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy may be formalized soon.
• Norway is set to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an similar ban remains "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a proposal increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended parents to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is given. Although it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the resolution does not enact enforceable legislation.

"A strong age restriction is a good starting point," commented a leading MEP supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a possible ban, stating that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "supported by conclusive research".

Last year, interest built behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration vowed to further research the topic.

Charities have voiced concerns. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a young person who was lost after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a simple age ban might not improve online safety and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are safe and age appropriate for children," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, action is largely unfolding at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a law capping under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures requiring adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and calls from some figures to copy this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Outlook

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

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might backfire". The organization points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

While this international conversation evolves, the steps of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to self-regulate.