The Australian decisive action to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.
European Movement
Throughout Europe, a growing number of countries are considering comparable restrictions.
- The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our youngsters' youth". A law is expected to be passed soon.
- Norway is preparing to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
- Ireland is developing a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australian-model ban could be "an options on the table".
- In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The government in the Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.
For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a symbolic motion calling for a ban for under-16s unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these apps, the resolution does not enact mandatory rules.
"An effective age restriction is a good starting point," said the parliamentarian driving the initiative.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye
For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a possible ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong research".
Previously, support grew behind a bill to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. However, the administration vowed to further research the matter.
Advocacy groups have raised warnings. A prominent charity founded by the family of a girl who died after encountering disturbing online content contends that a simple age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of harm when teens turn 16.
"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," stated a influential peer.
The US: A Fragmented Approach
In the United States, action is largely happening at the regional level due to federal stalemate.
- The state of Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
- Florida has passed a measure barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
- The state of Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed bills demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media profiles.
Despite cross-party agreement and calls from some politicians to follow the Australian example, a US-wide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
International Perspectives
Beyond the West, additional countries are similarly taking action.
- The Malaysian government aims to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.
But, international bodies strike a more nuanced position. Unicef has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve user protection.
While this worldwide debate continues, the actions of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers globally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.
