The Australian controversial policy to prohibit social platforms access for those under 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, safety advocates, and guardians are observing with great interest to see if this strategy will set a precedent for the rest of the world.
The European Momentum
Throughout Europe, a increasing chorus of countries are moving toward parallel restrictions.
- The Danish government has stated a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and networks are "robbing our children's innocence". Legislation may be enacted next year.
- Norway is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to protect the young from the "power of the algorithms".
- The Irish government is developing a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an Australia-style ban remains "one of the options under consideration".
- In Spain, the leader has called on lawmakers to enact a law lifting the access age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a related move, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers.
- The administration in The Dutch government has urged families to block their kids from social media up to the age of 15.
For the broader EU, the European parliament has adopted a non-binding motion calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 except if guardian approval is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the step does not establish mandatory rules.
"A clear age limit is a useful first step," commented the MEP driving the resolution.
Britain: A Cautious Approach
For the United Kingdom, the government has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no option is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by strong evidence".
Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the topic.
Charities have expressed apprehensions. A prominent charity set up by the family of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to dangerous platform posts argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of exposure when teens turn 16.
"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the tech sector to design tools that are secure and age appropriate for minors," commented a influential child protection advocate.
The United States: A Decentralized Landscape
Stateside, legislation is mostly unfolding at the state level due to national gridlock.
- Utah demands guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
- The state of Florida has enacted a bill barring those below 14 from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
- The state of Virginia has approved a regulation restricting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access needing adult consent.
- Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed bills demanding parental consent for minors to create social media presences.
Even with bipartisan support and calls from various figures to copy this lead, a nationwide ban is right now seen as unlikely.
Worldwide Outlook
Beyond Europe and the US, other states are likewise exploring options.
- Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for under-16s beginning next year.
- Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.
But, global agencies take a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even prove counterproductive". The agency notes that social networks can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to prioritize safety.
As this global discussion unfolds, the policies of Australia and several other countries show that policymakers internationally are no longer willing to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.
