Could Other Countries Emulate Australia's Example in Restricting Social Media for Under-16s?

The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for young people below 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, campaigners, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for the rest of the world.

The European Trend

Across Europe, a growing chorus of states are moving toward similar measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader stating that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our kids' youth". A law may be enacted soon.
• Norway is planning to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to authenticate the user details of social media users. The media minister have indicated that an Australia-style ban is "a potential measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to approve a bill raising the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable step, including an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The authorities in The Netherlands has advised parents to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for minors without parental consent is given. While it cautions of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the resolution does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age barrier is a useful starting point," commented one parliamentarian driving the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Approach

Across Britain, the government has kept open a future ban, stating that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".

Earlier, interest grew behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the topic.

Campaign organizations have voiced apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a young person who was lost after being exposed to disturbing platform posts argues that a strict age ban could fail to improve online safety and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16.

"The Australian ban is a response to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are secure and suitable for children," stated a prominent child protection advocate.

America: A Fragmented Approach

In the United States, action is mostly unfolding at the state level due to national inaction.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for minors to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning under-14s from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has approved a law capping under-16s to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further use needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed laws requiring guardian approval for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from some politicians to mimic Australia's example, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Views

Apart from Europe and the US, additional countries are also exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for those under sixteen effective next year.
• Brazil has increased the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

But, world bodies take a more cautious tone. Unicef has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for tech companies to invest in user protection.

As this international debate evolves, the actions of the Australian government and others indicate that states internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.