Australia's controversial action to ban social media access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching closely to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.
European Movement
In Europe, a rising chorus of countries are exploring comparable bans.
- The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and networks are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed in the coming year.
- Norway is preparing to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
- Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban could be "an tools on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
- In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a related action, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for older teenagers.
- The authorities in the Netherlands has advised guardians to prevent their children from social media until 15.
At the EU level, the European parliament has approved a symbolic resolution demanding a ban for minors except if guardian approval is given. While it warns of the "habit-forming" quality of these services, the resolution does not create mandatory rules.
"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," commented the MEP behind the initiative.
Britain: An Evidence-Based Approach
In the UK, the government has remained open to a possible ban, arguing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence".
Last year, support gathered behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.
Campaign organizations have raised concerns. One foundation founded by the relatives of a teenager who died after viewing dangerous platform posts suggests that a strict age ban could fail to protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people turn 16.
"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for young users," commented a influential peer.
The US: A Fragmented Picture
Stateside, action is mostly occurring at the state government level amid country-wide stalemate.
- The state of Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
- Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from joining social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
- Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly introduced bills mandating guardian approval for teenagers to create social media profiles.
Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from certain individuals to follow Australia's example, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.
International Outlook
Apart from the West, further countries are also exploring options.
- The Malaysian government intends to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- Brazil has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.
But, global bodies take a more measured tone. The UN children's agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for vulnerable youth and that bans should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.
Even as this worldwide conversation unfolds, the actions of this nation and its followers indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.
