Australia's decisive policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is sending ripples internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for countries abroad.
The European Movement
Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are exploring parallel measures.
- Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that phones and apps are "robbing our kids' childhood". A law could be enacted soon.
- Norway is set to implement a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the AI".
- Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Authorities have indicated that an similar ban remains "one of the tools on the table".
- In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a law increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
- In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a legislative committee has recommended a comparable action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
- The authorities in the Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their children from social media before 15.
Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is given. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the move does not establish enforceable legislation.
"A clear age limit is a solid foundation," commented the MEP driving the resolution.
The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye
For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in conclusive research".
Last year, interest built behind a proposal to enact controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately watered down. However, the administration committed to conduct more studies the topic.
Charities have voiced warnings. An organization set up by the family of a girl who took her own life after being exposed to harmful online content argues that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens reach the legal age.
"This ban is a response to the refusal of the tech sector to create tools that are safe and age appropriate for young users," stated a prominent peer.
The US: A State-by-State Approach
In the United States, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of national inaction.
- Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
- Florida has passed a law prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
- Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional access dependent on a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed bills mandating parental consent for under-16s to create social media profiles.
Even with widespread concern and calls from certain politicians to follow Australia's path, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
Worldwide Outlook
Apart from the West, further countries are similarly exploring options.
- The Malaysian government plans to prohibit social media for under-16s starting from next year.
- Brazil has raised the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.
However, international bodies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The body notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.
Even as this worldwide conversation unfolds, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that states internationally are no longer content to stand by for tech companies to act voluntarily.
