🔗 Share this article

Australia's controversial move to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Officials, campaigners, and parents are watching closely to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising group of states are exploring similar restrictions.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". A law is expected to be formalized next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban remains "one of the tools in reserve".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to pass a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a related step, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has approved a advisory motion demanding a ban for minors unless guardian approval is given. Although it warns of the "addictive" design of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a solid first step," stated a leading MEP supporting the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

In the UK, the leadership has not ruled out a future ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "based on robust evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the government committed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. One foundation founded by the relatives of a girl who was lost after encountering disturbing platform posts contends that a blanket age ban could fail to protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to design tools that are safe and suitable for minors," stated a prominent online safety campaigner.

The US: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is mostly happening at the state government level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a measure barring children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law restricting under-16s to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed bills demanding adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Despite cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to mimic the Australian path, a federal ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Beyond Europe and the US, additional states are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16.

But, international agencies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

While this international conversation evolves, the steps of the Australian government and others demonstrate that governments internationally are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to self-regulate.