🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive move to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Politicians, campaigners, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.

The European Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of countries are exploring comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister arguing that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our kids' childhood". A law is expected to be passed next year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to enforce a access barrier of 15, highlighting the need to protect children from the "influence of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Officials have suggested that an Australia-style ban is "one of the tools on the table".
• In Spain, the president has urged the legislature to pass a law increasing the access 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 suggested a related action, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a advisory motion supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is granted. Although it cautions of the "addictive" nature of these platforms, the move does not create mandatory rules.

"A strong age limit is a solid first step," said one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "nothing is discarded" but maintaining any policy must be "grounded in robust evidence".

Previously, interest built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after viewing harmful platform posts suggests that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "dangerous transition" of risk when young people turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to create platforms and apps that are safe and age appropriate for children," stated a influential peer.

The US: A State-by-State Landscape

Across America, regulation is mostly occurring at the local government level against a backdrop of national inaction.

• The state of Utah mandates guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further time needing adult consent.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly enacted measures requiring parental consent for under-16s to set up social media presences.

Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from various individuals to follow the Australian example, a federal ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Perspectives

Apart from the West, further states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has lifted the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, international organizations strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "could backfire". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for vulnerable young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this international debate evolves, the actions of this nation and others indicate that governments around the world are increasingly content to stand by for platforms to act voluntarily.