Will Different Nations Emulate Australia's in Prohibiting Social Media for Under-16s?

The Australian controversial policy to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, child protection groups, and parents are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a rising number of nations are considering comparable restrictions.

• The Danish government has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that phones and platforms are "robbing our kids' childhood". The policy could be passed in the coming year.
• Norway is preparing to implement a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "a potential options on the table".
• In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a law raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a similar action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended parents to restrict their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has approved a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for under-16s without guardian approval is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these apps, the move does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a useful starting point," said one European lawmaker behind the initiative.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a potential ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "grounded in strong research".

Last year, support gathered behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the government committed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have raised concerns. An organization set up by the family of a girl who died after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when users reach the legal age.

"The Australian ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is largely happening at the state level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.

• Utah demands guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has enacted a bill barring those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation capping under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with extra time requiring a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted bills mandating parental consent for minors to create social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various figures to copy this example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as a distant prospect.

International Perspectives

Beyond the West, further nations are likewise considering moves.

• The Malaysian government intends to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for Instagram to 16.

However, global agencies adopt a more measured position. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to improve user protection.

Even as this international debate unfolds, the steps of Australia and several other countries show that governments internationally are less and less content to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.