🔗 Share this article

Australia's bold action to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

The European Movement

In Europe, a growing number of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that phones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". A law could be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect young people from the "influence of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban is "an tools on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal increasing the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a comparable move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised families to block their kids from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a non-binding statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without a parent decides otherwise is given. Even though it warns of the "addictive" nature of these services, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age limit is a useful starting point," said a leading MEP supporting the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

Across Britain, the leadership has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is discarded" but insisting any action must be "supported by robust data".

Last year, momentum gathered behind a proposal to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually watered down. However, the administration pledged to further research the topic.

Charities have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to dangerous online content contends that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the inability of the social media companies to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and fit for young users," commented a leading child protection advocate.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly happening at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• Virginia has approved a rule capping under-16s to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced bills requiring adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from certain figures to copy Australia's example, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Beyond these regions, additional countries are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for Instagram to 16.

However, world bodies take a more measured position. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans pose dangers and "could backfire". The agency highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

While this global conversation continues, the policies of the Australian government and its followers show that states around the world are less and less willing to delay for tech companies to self-regulate.