The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are watching intently to see if this approach will set a precedent for other nations.
The European Movement
Across Europe, a growing group of nations are moving toward similar measures.
- Denmark has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that phones and networks are "taking away our children's childhood". The policy is expected to be passed soon.
- Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
- Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the user details of social media users. Officials have suggested that an similar ban remains "a potential tools under consideration".
- In Spain, the leader has called on the legislature to pass a bill increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has endorsed a related step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
- The authorities in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.
For the broader EU, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for under-16s without a parent decides otherwise is given. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not enact binding law.
"A strong age barrier is a good foundation," stated a leading MEP supporting the resolution.
The United Kingdom: A Watchful Eye
For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "grounded in strong evidence".
Previously, momentum built behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the topic.
Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a young person who died after encountering dangerous online content contends that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.
"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to design platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for minors," said a leading peer.
The United States: A Fragmented Approach
In the United States, legislation is primarily unfolding at the regional level amid country-wide gridlock.
- Utah requires parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
- Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has passed a rule capping under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with any further access needing adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws mandating guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media presences.
Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from some individuals to copy the Australian example, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.
Worldwide Outlook
Beyond Europe and the US, other countries are also considering moves.
- Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers effective next year.
- Brazil has increased the required age for Instagram to 16.
Yet, world agencies adopt a more measured position. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that government action should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to invest in child safeguards.
While this global conversation unfolds, the steps of Australia and others show that states globally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.
