🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive policy to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

Across Europe Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of states are considering similar restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our kids' innocence". A law is expected to be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the user details of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an similar ban remains "a potential tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged the legislature to pass a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has recommended a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged parents to prevent their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has passed a advisory resolution demanding a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the step does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," stated one European lawmaker driving the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "based on robust research".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Charities have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to harmful online content contends that a strict age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a response to the inability of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for young users," said a leading peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

Stateside, regulation is mostly happening at the regional level amid country-wide inaction.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure banning those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a rule capping under-16s to a single hour of social media use per day, with extra use needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills mandating parental consent for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from certain figures to mimic this lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Views

Apart from Europe and the US, additional states are also exploring options.

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

But, world organizations adopt a more measured position. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "may even backfire". The body highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to improve safety.

Even as this global debate evolves, the policies of the Australian government and others demonstrate that governments internationally are increasingly content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.