The Australian controversial action to restrict social networking access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Officials, safety advocates, and parents are monitoring intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.
The European Movement
Across Europe, a rising group of countries are considering comparable measures.
- The Danish government plans a restriction on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and networks are "robbing our kids' youth". A law could be passed next year.
- Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "influence of the AI".
- Ireland is working on a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
- In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to enact a law raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related move, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
- The government in the Netherlands has urged families to block their kids from social media before 15.
At the EU level, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding motion supporting a ban for minors without guardian approval is provided. While it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.
"An effective age limit is a good foundation," commented one parliamentarian supporting the measure.
The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach
In the UK, the administration has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any action must be "grounded in robust research".
Previously, momentum gathered behind a proposal to enact limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the government committed to further research the matter.
Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after encountering disturbing social media material contends that a blanket age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of harm when teens become eligible.
"The Australian ban is a response to the failure of the tech sector to build tools that are appropriate and suitable for minors," said a prominent online safety campaigner.
The US: A Fragmented Picture
Stateside, regulation is largely happening at the state government level due to federal stalemate.
- Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls overnight use.
- The state of Florida has enacted a measure banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
- The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media use per day, with additional access requiring parental permission.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced bills requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media profiles.
Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some individuals to follow Australia's lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
International Outlook
Apart from Europe and the US, additional countries are likewise considering moves.
- The Malaysian government intends to prohibit social media for those under sixteen beginning next year.
- Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.
Yet, international agencies take a more nuanced tone. The UN children's agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.
As this international discussion evolves, the policies of the Australian government and others indicate that states internationally are no longer content to wait for platforms to act voluntarily.
