🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are watching intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of nations are exploring comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader declaring that smartphones and apps are "taking away our children's youth". A law could be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have indicated that an similar ban is "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked the legislature to enact a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a related move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a advisory resolution demanding a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is provided. Although it warns of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," said one European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

Britain: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the administration has remained open to a future ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, interest built behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. However, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. An organization set up by the relatives of a young person who was lost after viewing disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban might not improve online safety and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," stated a influential peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Landscape

Stateside, legislation is mostly happening at the state level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has signed a law prohibiting children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has passed a regulation limiting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced bills requiring guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and calls from certain politicians to follow Australia's example, a federal ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, other nations are similarly considering moves.

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

However, global bodies take a more measured stance. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might have unintended consequences". The organization notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

While this worldwide conversation unfolds, the steps of Australia and others show that governments globally are no longer prepared to stand by for tech companies to self-regulate.