The Australian bold action to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Politicians, child protection groups, and guardians are monitoring with great interest to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.
European Momentum
Throughout Europe, a increasing group of countries are moving toward similar measures.
- Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the PM declaring that smartphones and networks are "taking away our kids' youth". Legislation could be enacted in the coming year.
- Norway is planning to enforce a access barrier of 15, citing the need to shield children from the "manipulative force of the algorithms".
- Ireland is introducing a online verification tool to verify the user details of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban is "an tools on the table".
- In The Spanish government, the president has urged lawmakers to approve a bill increasing the legal age for joining social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a comparable step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for adolescents.
- The administration in The Netherlands has urged guardians to prevent their kids from social media before 15.
For the broader EU, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution calling for a ban for under-16s except if parental consent is given. While it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the move does not enact binding law.
"An effective age barrier is a good first step," said a leading MEP supporting the measure.
The UK: A Cautious Eye
In the UK, the government has kept open a potential ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any action must be "grounded in strong data".
Earlier, support built behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was eventually modified. However, the administration pledged to further research the topic.
Campaign organizations have expressed apprehensions. One foundation set up by the relatives of a young person who died after being exposed to disturbing platform posts contends that a simple age ban might not protect children and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when young people become eligible.
"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to create products and services that are secure and suitable for minors," commented a prominent child protection advocate.
The US: A Fragmented Landscape
In the United States, action is largely occurring at the regional government level amid federal gridlock.
- Utah requires parental consent for minors to use social media and limits overnight use.
- The state of Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
- Virginia has enacted a law capping teenagers to one hour of social media access per day, with additional use needing adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also introduced laws demanding adult authorization for teenagers to set up social media profiles.
Despite bipartisan support and proposals from various politicians to mimic this path, a federal ban is currently seen as improbable.
Global Perspectives
Outside of Europe and the US, additional countries are similarly taking action.
- Malaysia intends to ban social media for teenagers starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.
But, international organizations take a more nuanced stance. A major UN agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "might prove counterproductive". The agency points out that online platforms can be a "critical link" for marginalized children and that regulation should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.
As this worldwide discussion evolves, the steps of Australia and others show that governments internationally are no longer prepared to wait for tech companies to self-regulate.
