🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to restrict social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this strategy will become a template for the rest of the world.

European Movement

In Europe, a rising number of nations are moving toward similar restrictions.

• The Danish government plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that phones and apps are "taking away our kids' youth". Legislation may be passed next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect the young from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital wallet to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have stated that an similar ban is "an tools under consideration".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to approve a law lifting the access age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a related action, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised parents to block their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has approved a symbolic statement supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is granted. While it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these apps, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age barrier is a useful first step," said one MEP supporting the measure.

The United Kingdom: A Cautious Approach

In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is being dismissed" but insisting any decision must be "supported by conclusive research".

Previously, interest grew behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the government committed to further research the issue.

Charities have raised warnings. One foundation set up by the relatives of a teenager who took her own life after viewing disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "dangerous transition" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the refusal of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are appropriate and suitable for young users," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

America: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, legislation is primarily occurring at the state level amid national gridlock.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a measure barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on a guardian's okay.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced bills requiring guardian approval for under-16s to open social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from some figures to copy Australia's path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

Worldwide Views

Beyond these regions, additional nations are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

However, world organizations take a more measured position. Unicef has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this global conversation evolves, the policies of this nation and several other countries indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.