Might Other States Pursue Australia's Example in Banning Online Networks for Teenagers Under 16?

Australia's controversial policy to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching closely to see if this approach will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

European Movement

In Europe, a growing group of countries are considering similar bans.

• Denmark has announced a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and apps are "taking away our children's innocence". A law is expected to be enacted soon.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to safeguard children from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to confirm the identity and age of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "one of the measures in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has asked parliament to enact a law lifting the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a government panel has recommended a related action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for under-16s except if guardian approval is granted. While it cautions of the "addictive" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a solid first step," commented the parliamentarian supporting the resolution.

The United Kingdom: A Watchful Approach

For the United Kingdom, the administration has kept open a future ban, stating that "no option is discarded" but maintaining any decision must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Last year, interest gathered behind a proposal to impose restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the matter.

Charities have voiced apprehensions. An organization founded by the loved ones of a teenager who was lost after being exposed to harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of risk when young people reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to build products and services that are secure and suitable for young users," said a influential peer.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, regulation is mostly unfolding at the local level due to federal inaction.

• Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has signed a bill barring under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with additional use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted bills mandating adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to follow this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Views

Beyond Europe and the US, further countries are likewise exploring options.

• The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "may even backfire". The agency notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for marginalized young people and that bans should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize safety.

Even as this international conversation continues, the policies of Australia and several other countries demonstrate that states around the world are no longer willing to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.