The Australian decisive policy to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and parents are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
The European Momentum
Across Europe, a increasing group of states are moving toward comparable restrictions.
- Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation could be formalized in the coming year.
- Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
- Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media users. The media minister have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools in reserve".
- In Spain, the president has urged lawmakers to pass a law raising the access 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 related action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
- The authorities in The Netherlands has urged families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has passed a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is granted. While it warns of the "habit-forming" design of these platforms, the move does not enact enforceable legislation.
"A clear age barrier is a solid foundation," commented one MEP behind the measure.
Britain: A Watchful Approach
For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but stressing any action must be "based on robust data".
Last year, momentum grew behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration vowed to further research the matter.
Campaign organizations have raised concerns. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to harmful platform posts argues that a simple age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.
"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to design products and services that are safe and age appropriate for children," said a leading online safety campaigner.
The US: A Decentralized Approach
In the United States, regulation is mostly occurring at the local level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction.
- Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
- The state of Florida has enacted a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
- The state of Virginia has approved a law capping teenagers to a single hour of social media time per day, with additional time needing a guardian's okay.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding adult authorization for teenagers to create social media presences.
Despite bipartisan support and proposals from some politicians to follow this path, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.
Global Outlook
Beyond Europe and the US, other states are similarly taking action.
- Malaysia plans to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
- Brazil has increased the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.
But, global bodies take a more nuanced position. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The organization notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in safety.
As this international conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that governments globally are less and less willing to wait for the industry to act voluntarily.
