🔗 Share this article

Australia's decisive action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Officials, campaigners, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for other nations.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and apps are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have stated that an similar ban remains "a potential tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a bill lifting the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The government in the Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory resolution supporting a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not enact binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good first step," commented one European lawmaker supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the government has remained open to a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".

Last year, support built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration committed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after viewing harmful social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and fit for children," commented a influential online safety campaigner.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is primarily unfolding at the local level against a backdrop of national stalemate.

• Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills demanding guardian approval for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and calls from some figures to copy this path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Outlook

Apart from these regions, other states are also considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, world agencies adopt a more measured position. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The body highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

While this worldwide discussion unfolds, the actions of Australia and its followers indicate that governments internationally are less and less prepared to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.