🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to restrict social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing intently to see if this strategy will inspire imitation for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing chorus of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and networks are "stealing our kids' childhood". A law may be enacted soon.
• Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media users. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "a potential tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on lawmakers to approve a proposal lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

At the EU level, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is provided. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a solid first step," stated one European lawmaker driving the initiative.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, support gathered behind a bill to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the administration committed to investigate the matter.

Charities have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a girl who took her own life after encountering disturbing platform posts suggests that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to design platforms and apps that are secure and fit for minors," said a leading online safety campaigner.

The United States: A State-by-State Approach

In the United States, regulation is largely occurring at the state level amid national gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a rule limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted bills mandating guardian approval for minors to create social media accounts.

Despite widespread concern and calls from some figures to mimic this lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Views

Apart from these regions, further states are similarly exploring options.

• The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, global bodies adopt a more measured tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "could prove counterproductive". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to invest in safety.

While this international conversation continues, the actions of the Australian government and others show that states internationally are increasingly prepared to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.