🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social media access for young people below 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Trend

In Europe, a growing chorus of nations are moving toward parallel restrictions.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister stating that mobile devices and platforms are "stealing our children's innocence". The policy is expected to be passed soon.
• Norway is set to implement a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media users. Officials have stated that an similar ban remains "one of the measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has asked parliament to approve a law increasing the access age for using social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for under-15s, and a government panel has endorsed a related move, including an overnight "internet blackout" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is granted. Although it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these platforms, the step does not create binding law.

"A clear age limit is a solid first step," commented a leading European lawmaker driving the resolution.

The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Stance

For the United Kingdom, the administration has remained open to a future ban, arguing that "no measure is being dismissed" but stressing any action must be "supported by strong evidence".

Last year, momentum built behind a legislative effort to enact limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end watered down. However, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity founded by the family of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when users reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the failure of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a prominent peer.

The US: A Fragmented Approach

Across America, legislation is mostly happening at the state government level amid country-wide inaction.

• The state of Utah requires guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has passed a law prohibiting children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting under-16s to 60 minutes of social media time per day, with extra access dependent on a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise enacted laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to open social media presences.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from some politicians to follow this lead, a federal ban is right now seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Apart from these regions, other nations are likewise taking action.

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

But, international agencies adopt a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions have downsides and "might have unintended consequences". The agency points out that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

Even as this international discussion continues, the actions of the Australian government and several other countries demonstrate that states globally are less and less willing to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.