🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.

European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of states are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "taking away our kids' childhood". Legislation is expected to be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to confirm the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have indicated that an similar ban remains "an tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has urged parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory statement supporting a ban for minors without parental consent is granted. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the move does not create binding law.

"A clear age barrier is a good first step," said a leading European lawmaker behind the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Earlier, momentum gathered behind a bill to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the government vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have raised warnings. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are safe and fit for children," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Across America, regulation is mostly occurring at the regional government level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates adult approval for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a law banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills demanding guardian approval for teenagers to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some figures to mimic this example, a US-wide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

Apart from Europe and the US, further countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to restrict social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations strike a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "could backfire". The organization highlights that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

As this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and several other countries show that governments around the world are less and less content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.