Australia's controversial policy to ban social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are observing with great interest to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world.
The European Trend
Throughout Europe, a increasing group of states are considering comparable bans.
- Denmark has announced a ban on social media for under-15s, with the PM declaring that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our children's childhood". The policy is expected to be enacted soon.
- Norway is preparing to introduce a age restriction of 15, citing the need to shield young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
- Ireland is developing a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media users. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "an tools under consideration".
- In The Spanish government, the prime minister has urged parliament to enact a law increasing the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
- In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their kids from social media before 15.
Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution calling for a ban for minors unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it warns of the "habit-forming" nature of these services, the step does not enact binding law.
"An effective age limit is a good starting point," said the MEP behind the resolution.
The United Kingdom: A Cautious Stance
In the UK, the administration has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any action must be "supported by robust evidence".
Previously, momentum built behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually watered down. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the issue.
Advocacy groups have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a girl who died after viewing disturbing online content suggests that a strict age ban might not protect children and could create a "cliff edge" of risk when users turn 16.
"Australia's ban is a response to the inability of the tech sector to build platforms and apps that are secure and age appropriate for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.
America: A State-by-State Landscape
Across America, legislation is largely occurring at the regional level amid country-wide stalemate.
- Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and controls nighttime use.
- Florida has enacted a measure prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has approved a rule restricting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with any further access dependent on adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also enacted measures requiring adult authorization for minors to open social media accounts.
Despite cross-party agreement and suggestions from certain politicians to copy the Australian path, a nationwide ban is currently seen as unlikely.
Global Views
Outside of the West, further countries are also considering moves.
- Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
- Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.
But, world bodies strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has warned that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize child safeguards.
While this worldwide conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and others demonstrate that policymakers internationally are no longer prepared to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.