The Australian decisive policy to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and guardians are observing closely to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.
The European Movement
Across Europe, a growing chorus of nations are considering similar restrictions.
- Denmark plans a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that smartphones and apps are "stealing our kids' youth". A law is expected to be passed next year.
- Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting 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 account holders. The media minister have suggested that an similar ban could be "one of the measures on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has called on the legislature to enact a proposal increasing the legal age for using social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has proposed a ban for those under fifteen, and a government panel has recommended a similar move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The government in the Netherlands has recommended guardians to restrict their kids from social media until 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has approved a advisory statement calling for a ban for under-16s unless a parent decides otherwise is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.
"A clear age restriction is a good foundation," commented one parliamentarian supporting the measure.
Britain: A Watchful Eye
In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any decision must be "grounded in robust research".
Last year, momentum built behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government committed to investigate the topic.
Campaign organizations have expressed concerns. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a young person who died after encountering dangerous online content contends that a strict age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users turn 16.
"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are safe and suitable for children," said a prominent online safety campaigner.
The United States: A Fragmented Landscape
Stateside, action is mostly happening at the regional level against a backdrop of country-wide stalemate.
- Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts overnight use.
- The state of Florida has passed a law prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it faces legal challenges.
- Virginia has passed a regulation limiting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with any further time requiring parental permission.
- Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed measures mandating guardian approval for minors to create social media presences.
Even with cross-party agreement and suggestions from various politicians to follow the Australian lead, a nationwide ban is currently seen as improbable.
International Views
Outside of these regions, further states are likewise considering moves.
- The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for under-16s effective next year.
- Brazil has raised the minimum age for one major platform to 16.
But, international agencies take a more cautious stance. A major UN agency has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.
Even as this worldwide conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and its followers indicate that states internationally are no longer willing to delay for tech companies to act voluntarily.
