🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial policy to restrict social networking access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are watching closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are considering comparable measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that smartphones and networks are "stealing our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be enacted soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect the young from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the identity and age of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on parliament to enact a bill increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has recommended a similar step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has urged parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the resolution does not enact binding law.

"A strong age limit is a solid foundation," said one MEP supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "supported by strong research".

Previously, momentum grew behind a bill to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration committed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised apprehensions. One foundation established by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when teens reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to build products and services that are secure and fit for children," commented a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is primarily occurring at the state level against a backdrop of national gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• The state of Florida has signed a bill prohibiting those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a law capping minors to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted bills demanding parental consent for teenagers to open social media accounts.

Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from certain individuals to follow the Australian example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

International Views

Outside of these regions, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "could have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

As this international debate unfolds, the steps of the Australian government and its followers demonstrate that policymakers around the world are less and less content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.