The Australian controversial action to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
European Trend
Across Europe, a growing chorus of nations are exploring parallel bans.
- Denmark plans a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the leader stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our youngsters' youth". The policy may be formalized next year.
- Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
- The Irish government is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "a potential measures on the table".
- In Spain, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a law raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related move, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
- The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it warns of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.
"A clear age barrier is a solid foundation," said a leading European lawmaker behind the measure.
The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance
In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in conclusive evidence".
Last year, momentum gathered behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government vowed to further research the topic.
Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. An organization established by the family of a girl who took her own life after viewing dangerous platform posts contends that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when young people become eligible.
"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and suitable for minors," stated a leading child protection advocate.
The United States: A State-by-State Approach
In the United States, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level due to country-wide inaction.
- The state of Utah demands guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
- Florida has passed a bill barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
- The state of Virginia has passed a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media time per day, with extra access needing parental permission.
- The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted bills mandating parental consent for minors to set up social media accounts.
Even with widespread concern and proposals from some politicians to copy the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.
International Perspectives
Apart from Europe and the US, other nations are also exploring options.
- The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- Brazil has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.
But, global agencies adopt a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could backfire". The organization notes that online platforms can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.
While this international debate continues, the steps of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.
