🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sending ripples internationally. Officials, campaigners, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

European Momentum

In Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are considering comparable bans.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM arguing that phones and platforms are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is set to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the AI".
• The Irish government is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. Officials have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "an measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged parliament to approve a law increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to prevent their children from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has passed a non-binding motion calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it cautions of the "addictive" design of these apps, the move does not establish binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful foundation," stated the European lawmaker behind the initiative.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the government has remained open to a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by minors, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the administration committed to investigate the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a simple age ban may not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of harm when users become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for minors," commented a leading peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, action is mostly happening at the state government level due to federal gridlock.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has signed a bill banning children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting minors to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra time needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted bills requiring adult authorization for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and calls from various figures to follow the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

Worldwide Views

Beyond the West, further states are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, international agencies take a more cautious tone. Unicef has advised that social media bans have downsides and "could backfire". The body highlights that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in user protection.

While this international conversation continues, the actions of Australia and its followers show that states globally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.