🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, campaigners, and families are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a growing chorus of countries are moving toward similar restrictions.

• The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our kids' youth". Legislation may be passed next year.
• Norway is preparing to enforce a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an options on the table".
• In Spain, the president has called on parliament to approve a bill raising the minimum age for using social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related action, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
• The government in The Dutch government has recommended guardians to restrict their children from social media before 15.

At the EU level, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is granted. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the step does not establish enforceable legislation.

"A clear age limit is a useful starting point," said a leading European lawmaker supporting the resolution.

The UK: A Cautious Stance

Across Britain, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, emphasizing that "no option is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by strong research".

Last year, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was ultimately weakened. However, the government pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. One foundation founded by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after viewing disturbing social media material argues that a strict age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the refusal of the social media companies to create tools that are appropriate and suitable for children," stated a prominent peer.

The US: A Fragmented Picture

Across America, regulation is primarily unfolding at the regional level due to federal inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits late-night use.
• Florida has signed a measure prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• The state of Virginia has enacted a regulation restricting teenagers to a single hour of social media access per day, with any further time requiring a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to mimic the Australian path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Worldwide Perspectives

Outside of the West, other states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, international organizations adopt a more nuanced tone. Unicef has warned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "might backfire". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "replacement" for platform operators to prioritize user protection.

Even as this worldwide debate unfolds, the actions of this nation and several other countries show that governments globally are less and less prepared to wait for platforms to make changes on their own.