The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are watching with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for countries abroad.
Across Europe Movement
In Europe, a rising chorus of states are moving toward parallel restrictions.
- Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law may be passed next year.
- The Norwegian government is set to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
- Ireland is working on a digital ID system to verify the identity and age of social media participants. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "a potential measures in reserve".
- In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to pass a law raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has suggested a comparable move, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The administration in the Netherlands has advised families to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic resolution calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. While it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not establish mandatory rules.
"A clear age limit is a solid foundation," commented a leading European lawmaker driving the measure.
The UK: An Evidence-Based Stance
For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by robust evidence".
Previously, interest grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.
Advocacy groups have raised concerns. An organization established by the loved ones of a young person who died after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a simple age ban may not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when teens turn 16.
"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are secure and suitable for children," stated a leading peer.
America: A State-by-State Approach
In the United States, action is largely occurring at the regional government level against a backdrop of national gridlock.
- Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and restricts late-night use.
- Florida has passed a law banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
- Virginia has passed a law restricting minors to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra time requiring a guardian's okay.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced measures requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media accounts.
Despite widespread concern and proposals from various politicians to follow the Australian path, a federal ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.
Global Views
Outside of Europe and the US, further states are also considering moves.
- Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- Brazil has raised the minimum age for Instagram to 16.
But, world bodies strike a more nuanced tone. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "might backfire". The organization notes that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.
As this global debate unfolds, the policies of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that states globally are no longer content to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.
