Will Different States Follow Australia's Example in Restricting Social Platforms for Under-16s?

The Australian controversial move to ban social media access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Trend

In Europe, a rising chorus of nations are exploring parallel bans.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that phones and platforms are "robbing our youngsters' innocence". A law could be formalized in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the measures on the table".
• In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to pass a bill lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has recommended parents to block their youngsters from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age limit is a good first step," stated one MEP driving the initiative.

The UK: A Watchful Approach

Across Britain, the leadership has kept open a future ban, stating that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "based on strong data".

Previously, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. Nonetheless, the administration vowed to further research the topic.

Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a girl who was lost after viewing dangerous social media material suggests that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users become eligible.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to build products and services that are safe and fit for children," said a prominent peer.

America: A Fragmented Picture

Across America, legislation is mostly happening at the regional level amid federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law banning under-14s from joining social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a regulation capping teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further access needing a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced laws requiring adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some politicians to copy this lead, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

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

• The Malaysian government plans to restrict social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has cautioned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization 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.

Even as this international conversation unfolds, the actions of this nation and its followers demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to wait for platforms to self-regulate.