🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial move to ban social platforms access for individuals under sixteen is sparking debate internationally. Officials, campaigners, and guardians are observing closely to see if this approach will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Trend

In Europe, a increasing number of states are exploring comparable restrictions.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's innocence". Legislation is expected to be passed next year.
• Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to safeguard young people from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to verify the user details of social media users. Authorities have stated that an Australia-style ban could be "one of the tools under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has urged lawmakers to enact a proposal raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related move, potentially involving an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Netherlands has advised guardians to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. While it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these apps, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," stated the MEP behind the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the administration has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on conclusive evidence".

Previously, interest gathered behind a proposal to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately watered down. Nonetheless, the government committed to investigate the topic.

Charities have voiced concerns. A prominent charity founded by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after encountering harmful social media material argues that a simple age ban might not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when users become eligible.

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

The US: A State-by-State Approach

Stateside, legislation is primarily happening at the regional level amid federal stalemate.

• Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and restricts overnight use.
• Florida has passed a measure barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra use needing parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed laws demanding parental consent for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from certain individuals to follow Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect.

Global Outlook

Apart from Europe and the US, other countries are also taking action.

• Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world organizations adopt a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable young people and that bans should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize safety.

While this global discussion unfolds, the steps of this nation and its followers indicate that states internationally are less and less willing to stand by for the industry to self-regulate.