🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial policy to ban social platforms access for young people below 16 is creating waves internationally. Politicians, campaigners, and families are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad.

The European Movement

In Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has announced a ban on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that phones and networks are "taking away our kids' innocence". Legislation may be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australian-model ban remains "an options under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has asked the legislature to approve a proposal lifting the minimum age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in the Netherlands has advised families to block their kids from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for under-16s except if a parent decides otherwise is provided. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules.

"A clear age limit is a useful foundation," stated one European lawmaker behind the measure.

The UK: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but stressing any decision must be "based on strong research".

Previously, interest grew behind a proposal to impose limits on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. Instead, the government vowed to further research the issue.

Advocacy groups have raised warnings. A prominent charity established by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing social media material suggests that a blanket age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users reach the legal age.

"Australia's ban is a response to the refusal of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," stated a influential child protection advocate.

The United States: A Fragmented Approach

Stateside, action is largely occurring at the state level against a backdrop of federal stalemate.

• Utah mandates parental consent for under-18s to use social media and controls late-night use.
• Florida has enacted a measure banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a rule restricting under-16s to one hour of social media access per day, with additional access dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed measures mandating parental consent for teenagers to open social media profiles.

Even with bipartisan support and proposals from various individuals to follow this path, a US-wide ban is right now seen as improbable.

Global Perspectives

Outside of Europe and the US, further states are similarly exploring options.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world bodies adopt a more cautious position. A major UN agency has advised that age-based restrictions pose dangers and "may even backfire". The organization points out that online platforms can be a "vital connection" for isolated youth and that regulation should not be a "excuse" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

Even as this worldwide debate evolves, the steps of this nation and others show that states globally are increasingly willing to delay for tech companies to make changes on their own.