🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial action to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are observing closely to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Momentum

In Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward similar bans.

• The Danish government has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our children's innocence". The policy may be formalized soon.
• Norway is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media participants. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged the legislature to approve a proposal increasing the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for minors unless parental consent is granted. Although it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a useful starting point," said one parliamentarian behind the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust research".

Previously, interest grew behind a bill to enact controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately watered down. Instead, the government pledged to further research the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. An organization set up by the family of a teenager who died after being exposed to dangerous platform posts contends that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," said a leading peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level amid federal inaction.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures mandating adult authorization for teenagers to create social media presences.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Beyond these regions, additional states are also considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16.

Yet, global bodies strike a more cautious position. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "might backfire". The organization highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for isolated young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in safety.

While this global discussion unfolds, the policies of this nation and its followers demonstrate that states around the world are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.