🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold policy to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a increasing number of states are moving toward parallel measures.

• Denmark plans a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM stating that smartphones and networks are "robbing our kids' youth". The policy may be enacted next year.
• Norway is set to enforce a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to protect children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is developing a digital ID system to confirm the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked lawmakers to pass a law raising the access age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the president has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has recommended a related move, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has urged families to prevent their youngsters from social media until 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion demanding a ban for minors unless parental consent is given. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the resolution does not establish binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a useful starting point," stated one European lawmaker behind the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has not ruled out a possible ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but maintaining any action must be "based on strong data".

Previously, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately weakened. Instead, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Advocacy groups have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after encountering harmful online content contends that a strict age ban might not protect children and could result in a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the social media companies to create products and services that are safe and fit for minors," commented a leading online safety campaigner.

America: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, regulation is primarily happening at the local level due to federal gridlock.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a bill banning those below 14 from accessing social media, though it is entangled in legal challenges.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with extra use requiring adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise enacted measures demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from various figures to copy this lead, a nationwide ban is presently seen as improbable.

International Views

Beyond the West, further states are likewise exploring options.

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

However, global bodies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that social media bans carry risks and "might backfire". The body notes that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to improve child safeguards.

While this international conversation unfolds, the actions of Australia and several other countries indicate that policymakers internationally are increasingly content to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.