🔗 Share this article

The Australian decisive move to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

In Europe, a rising number of nations are considering similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our kids' innocence". The policy may be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures on the table".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on parliament to approve a bill raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar action, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised families to prevent their children from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without parental consent is granted. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid starting point," stated the MEP driving the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong data".

Last year, momentum built behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government pledged to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing online content argues that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are secure and suitable for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, regulation is largely happening at the local level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with extra access requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced laws requiring guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some politicians to mimic Australia's path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Outlook

Beyond the West, additional countries are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international agencies strike a more nuanced tone. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The agency points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

Even as this worldwide discussion unfolds, the actions of Australia and others indicate that policymakers internationally are less and less content to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.