🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold move to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and families are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Movement

Throughout Europe, a rising chorus of countries are exploring comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation could be formalized next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the president has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a similar action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended families to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a advisory motion calling for a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid starting point," commented one MEP supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. Instead, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised concerns. A prominent charity set up by the family of a girl who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a strict age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build tools that are appropriate and fit for minors," stated a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Landscape

Stateside, legislation is mostly occurring at the state government level against a backdrop of national gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a law limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with additional time dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding parental consent for minors to set up social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from certain politicians to copy this lead, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Apart from the West, other countries are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, international agencies strike a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.

While this global debate continues, the policies of Australia and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.