🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are watching closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing number of states are exploring similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our kids' youth". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is working on a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an similar ban could be "one of the options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has urged parliament to pass a proposal raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a related move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a advisory motion demanding a ban for under-16s without parental consent is granted. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the resolution does not create binding law.

"A strong age limit is a good starting point," stated one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on robust research".

Earlier, interest built behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the issue.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the family of a young person who took her own life after encountering dangerous social media material contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to create tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for minors," commented a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

Across America, regulation is primarily happening at the state government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• The state of Virginia has approved a rule restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with additional use needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures requiring guardian approval for minors to create social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from various figures to follow this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, further countries are similarly exploring options.

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

However, global bodies take a more measured tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

As this global discussion unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for platforms to self-regulate.