🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to restrict social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Politicians, child protection groups, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing number of nations are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the PM stating that phones and apps are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". The policy may be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "power of the algorithms".
• The Irish government is introducing a digital ID system to confirm the age and identity of social media users. Officials have stated that an similar ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to approve a law lifting the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has suggested a comparable step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended parents to block their children from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory motion supporting a ban for minors except if a parent decides otherwise is granted. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," stated the parliamentarian supporting the initiative.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

In the UK, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, stating that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "grounded in strong evidence".

Earlier, interest grew behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration committed to investigate the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced concerns. One foundation established by the family of a young person who was lost after encountering harmful platform posts contends that a blanket age ban might not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of harm when young people reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the tech sector to create products and services that are safe and suitable for children," said a influential child protection advocate.

The US: A Decentralized Landscape

In the United States, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further access requiring parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also introduced laws requiring adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and suggestions from certain individuals to copy this lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are likewise exploring options.

• Malaysia intends to ban social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the access age for one major platform to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve safety.

While this global debate unfolds, the actions of Australia and several other countries show that states globally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.