🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to restrict social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate worldwide. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are watching intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

European Movement

In Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that phones and platforms are "stealing our children's childhood". A law could be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to verify the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to approve a proposal raising the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a similar move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Dutch government has advised guardians to prevent their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a symbolic statement supporting a ban for minors except if guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the resolution does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a solid starting point," said the MEP supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a future ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong research".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually modified. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised concerns. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who was lost after viewing dangerous platform posts argues that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for young users," said a influential online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Landscape

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the state level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law prohibiting those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra use requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures demanding parental consent for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite cross-party agreement and calls from certain figures to copy this lead, a US-wide ban is currently seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of the West, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more cautious tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans carry risks and "might backfire". The organization notes that online platforms can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this global conversation evolves, the actions of the Australian government and its followers show that policymakers internationally are increasingly willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.