Australia's bold policy to ban social networking access for those under 16 is sending ripples internationally. Lawmakers, safety advocates, and families are observing intently to see if this tactic will become a template for the rest of the world.
European Momentum
Across Europe, a increasing chorus of states are moving toward comparable measures.
- The Danish government has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that mobile devices and networks are "stealing our youngsters' childhood". The policy may be passed next year.
- Norway is set to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, pointing to the need to safeguard children from the "power of the recommendation systems".
- The Irish government is working on a digital ID system to confirm the user details of social media account holders. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures on the table".
- In Spain, the prime minister has asked the legislature to approve a bill lifting the legal age for accessing social media to 16.
- In France, the leader has floated the idea of a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a related step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
- The administration in the Netherlands has advised guardians to restrict their children from social media until 15.
Across the European Union, the EU parliament has passed a advisory statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless guardian approval is provided. Even though it highlights of the "compulsive" design of these platforms, the resolution does not establish enforceable legislation.
"A clear age limit is a solid first step," stated one European lawmaker supporting the measure.
The UK: A Watchful Stance
Across Britain, the government has not ruled out a possible ban, arguing that "no option is discarded" but stressing any action must be "grounded in strong research".
Earlier, support gathered behind a bill to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to investigate the matter.
Charities have voiced concerns. A prominent charity set up by the relatives of a teenager who was lost after encountering disturbing online content suggests that a strict age ban may not protect children and could create a "sudden drop-off" of harm when users reach the legal age.
"This ban is a reaction to the refusal of the Silicon Valley to build products and services that are secure and suitable for children," stated a influential child protection advocate.
America: A Decentralized Approach
Across America, action is largely occurring at the regional level amid federal gridlock.
- Utah demands parental consent for those under 18 to use social media and limits nighttime use.
- Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is subject to legal challenges.
- Virginia has passed a law limiting under-16s to a single hour of social media time per day, with extra time dependent on adult consent.
- The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also enacted laws mandating guardian approval for teenagers to set up social media presences.
Even with bipartisan support and suggestions from various politicians to mimic the Australian example, a nationwide ban is right now seen as improbable.
Global Views
Apart from these regions, other nations are similarly considering moves.
- The Malaysian government intends to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
- The Brazilian authorities has lifted the access age for the platform Instagram to 16.
Yet, world agencies take a more nuanced position. A major UN agency has advised that social media bans carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to invest in child safeguards.
Even as this international conversation evolves, the actions of Australia and its followers show that policymakers internationally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to make changes on their own.
