🔗 Share this article

The Australian controversial action to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are monitoring closely to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of states are moving toward parallel bans.

• The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is planning to introduce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to pass a law increasing the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable step, potentially involving an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is granted. Although it highlights of the "habit-forming" design of these services, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a solid starting point," commented the parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in strong data".

Earlier, interest grew behind a bill to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. An organization established by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing online content contends that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and fit for minors," said a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Landscape

In the United States, legislation is largely occurring at the local government level amid country-wide gridlock.

• Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is entangled in constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with any further use requiring adult consent.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise introduced measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to open social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from some politicians to follow Australia's lead, a federal ban is presently seen as improbable.

Global Views

Outside of Europe and the US, additional states are likewise taking action.

• Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, international agencies adopt a more cautious stance. Unicef has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

Even as this global debate evolves, the steps of Australia and others indicate that governments internationally are less and less willing to stand by for tech companies to make changes on their own.