🔗 Share this article

The nation's decisive action to prohibit social networking access for those under 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and parents are observing intently to see if this strategy will set a precedent for other nations.

Across Europe Momentum

Throughout Europe, a rising group of states are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark has stated a restriction on social media for children under fifteen, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our kids' youth". Legislation could be enacted next year.
• The Norwegian government is planning to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to protect young people from the "manipulative force of the AI".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to verify the identity and age of social media users. Officials have suggested that an similar ban is "a potential options under consideration".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to enact a proposal raising the legal age for joining social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has floated the idea of a ban for those under fifteen, and a parliamentary commission has suggested a related step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their youngsters from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a non-binding resolution supporting a ban for minors except if parental consent is granted. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" nature of these services, the move does not establish binding law.

"An effective age restriction is a useful first step," stated one parliamentarian supporting the measure.

Britain: A Cautious Eye

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has remained open to a future ban, stating that "nothing is off the table" but stressing any decision must be "grounded in conclusive research".

Earlier, interest built behind a bill to enact restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration committed to conduct more studies the matter.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a girl who was lost after viewing disturbing platform posts suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could lead to a "cliff edge" of risk when teens reach the legal age.

"This ban is a answer to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design tools that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," commented a prominent online safety campaigner.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

In the United States, action is mostly occurring at the local level due to federal inaction.

• Utah demands adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and limits overnight use.
• Florida has signed a law prohibiting those below 14 from creating accounts on social media, though it faces constitutional disputes.
• Virginia has enacted a regulation limiting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media use per day, with extra use dependent on parental permission.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly enacted measures demanding parental consent for under-16s to set up social media accounts.

Even with bipartisan support and calls from various politicians to mimic Australia's lead, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

Global Outlook

Outside of Europe and the US, additional nations are similarly taking action.

• The Malaysian government aims to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year.
• Brazil has increased the minimum age for the platform Instagram to 16.

Yet, global organizations strike a more cautious tone. A major UN agency has advised that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might backfire". The agency points out that social networks can be a "lifeline" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to improve user protection.

While this global conversation evolves, the policies of this nation and its followers demonstrate that states around the world are increasingly prepared to delay for platforms to make changes on their own.