🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a increasing number of states are exploring similar measures.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our kids' innocence". A law is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools on the table".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to approve a bill increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has endorsed a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is given. Even though it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age restriction is a useful foundation," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong research".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration vowed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. A prominent charity founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after encountering disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to build tools that are safe and suitable for minors," stated a leading peer.

America: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, regulation is primarily unfolding at the regional government level due to national inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill barring under-14s from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a regulation restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted laws requiring adult authorization for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and calls from various individuals to copy Australia's example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, further countries are also exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international agencies adopt a more measured stance. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The organization notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

As this worldwide discussion unfolds, the steps of Australia and others show that governments around the world are increasingly content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.