🔗 Share this article

The nation's controversial action to prohibit social networking access for young people below 16 is sending ripples worldwide. Politicians, safety advocates, and parents are watching intently to see if this tactic will become a template for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a growing number of states are moving toward comparable restrictions.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader declaring that smartphones and platforms are "taking away our children's childhood". A law could be passed soon.
• The Norwegian government is set to introduce a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
• The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to authenticate the identity and age of social media account holders. Authorities have stated that an similar ban is "a potential options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the president has urged the legislature to pass a bill raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable step, alongside an overnight "internet blackout" for older teenagers.
• The administration in The Dutch government has advised families to restrict their kids from social media before 15.

Across the European Union, the bloc's legislature has passed a non-binding motion demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 without guardian approval is provided. While it cautions of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the resolution does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a useful first step," commented a leading parliamentarian driving the resolution.

Britain: An Evidence-Based Stance

Across Britain, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Last year, support gathered behind a legislative effort to introduce restrictions on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately weakened. Nonetheless, the administration pledged to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed warnings. A prominent charity set up by the loved ones of a young person who took her own life after viewing harmful online content contends that a blanket age ban may not make platforms safer and could create a "cliff edge" of exposure when teens turn 16.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the tech sector to create products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for young users," commented a leading peer.

The US: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, regulation is largely happening at the state level amid federal inaction.

• Utah requires adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
• Florida has passed a law banning those below 14 from joining social media, though it is subject to court battles.
• Virginia has passed a rule restricting minors to a single hour of social media access per day, with extra time needing parental permission.
• The state of Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have similarly passed laws demanding adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media profiles.

Even with widespread concern and proposals from certain individuals to mimic the Australian path, a US-wide ban is currently seen as improbable.

International Perspectives

Beyond the West, additional nations are similarly considering moves.

• Malaysia intends to prohibit social media for teenagers beginning next year.
• Brazil has raised the access age for one major platform to 16.

However, world agencies take a more measured tone. A major UN agency has cautioned that blanket prohibitions pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The organization notes that the internet can be a "critical link" for marginalized youth and that bans should not be a "replacement" for social media firms to invest in user protection.

As this international conversation evolves, the actions of this nation and its followers indicate that governments internationally are increasingly content to stand by for platforms to make changes on their own.