🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and families are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of nations are exploring parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that phones and platforms are "taking away our children's youth". The policy could be passed soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to pass a law lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion demanding a ban for minors except if guardian approval is provided. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," commented a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Approach

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after encountering disturbing platform posts contends that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is primarily unfolding at the state level amid country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some politicians to mimic the Australian example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Apart from Europe and the US, additional countries are also exploring options.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, world agencies take a more nuanced tone. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The organization points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

Even as this worldwide debate unfolds, the policies of this nation and its followers demonstrate that governments internationally are no longer prepared to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.