🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial move to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are watching intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are exploring parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "taking away our children's childhood". A law is expected to be enacted next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media users. The media minister have stated that an similar ban is "a potential measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to approve a law lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a symbolic statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is provided. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the step does not establish binding law.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," stated the MEP behind the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the leadership has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Earlier, interest built behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people turn 16.

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

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the state government level due to country-wide gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding guardian approval for minors to create social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from certain politicians to follow this lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Beyond Europe and the US, other nations are also considering moves.

• The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.

However, world organizations adopt a more measured stance. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve child safeguards.

While this worldwide debate unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and its followers indicate that states around the world are less and less prepared to delay for tech companies to self-regulate.