🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate internationally. Officials, campaigners, and parents are observing intently to see if this tactic will set a precedent for countries abroad.

The European Momentum

Across Europe, a growing chorus of countries are moving toward parallel bans.

• Denmark plans a ban on social media for children under fifteen, with the PM arguing that smartphones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' youth". Legislation may be formalized next year.
• Norway is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to protect the young from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is working on a online verification tool to verify the identity and age of social media account holders. Officials have suggested that an Australian-model ban is "one of the options in reserve".
• In The Spanish government, the prime minister has asked parliament to pass a law lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
• In The French government, the president has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has suggested a comparable move, alongside an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The authorities in the Netherlands has urged families to block their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding motion supporting a ban for minors without a parent decides otherwise is given. Even though it cautions of the "habit-forming" nature of these platforms, the step does not create binding law.

"An effective age barrier is a useful first step," said the European lawmaker driving the measure.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Eye

For the United Kingdom, the administration has not ruled out a potential ban, stating that "no option is being dismissed" but stressing any policy must be "based on strong data".

Previously, interest gathered behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was eventually watered down. Instead, the government vowed to investigate the topic.

Advocacy groups have voiced warnings. An organization founded by the relatives of a girl who died after encountering disturbing social media material suggests that a strict age ban may not make platforms safer and could lead to a "dangerous transition" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a response to the failure of the Silicon Valley to create tools that are secure and suitable for children," stated a leading peer.

The United States: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, legislation is largely unfolding at the regional level amid federal inaction.

• The state of Utah requires parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and controls late-night use.
• The state of Florida has signed a law barring children under fourteen from creating accounts on social media, though it is subject to constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting teenagers to a single hour of social media use per day, with additional use requiring parental permission.
• Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed measures requiring guardian approval for teenagers to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and proposals from various individuals to mimic Australia's path, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Global Perspectives

Apart from Europe and the US, further nations are likewise taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to ban social media for those under sixteen starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has lifted the required age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, world organizations take a more nuanced stance. The UN children's agency has advised that blanket prohibitions have downsides and "could prove counterproductive". The body notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for marginalized young people and that regulation should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize safety.

While this global discussion unfolds, the steps of this nation and its followers show that governments internationally are less and less prepared to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.