🔗 Share this article

The nation's bold move to restrict social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and parents are observing with great interest to see if this approach will inspire imitation for countries abroad.

Across Europe Trend

Throughout Europe, a increasing group of states are moving toward comparable measures.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for under-15s, with the leader arguing that phones and networks are "robbing our youngsters' childhood". A law is expected to be enacted in the coming year.
• Norway is planning to implement a age restriction of 15, highlighting the need to shield young people from the "manipulative force of the recommendation systems".
• Ireland is developing a online verification tool to authenticate the age and identity of social media participants. Authorities have indicated that an Australian-model ban remains "one of the measures under consideration".
• In Spain, the leader has urged the legislature to enact a law increasing 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 parliamentary commission has suggested a comparable move, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The government in The Netherlands has recommended guardians to block their youngsters from social media until 15.

At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a non-binding statement demanding a ban for under-16s unless parental consent is given. While it highlights of the "habit-forming" quality of these apps, the step does not create mandatory rules.

"An effective age barrier is a good foundation," stated one MEP behind the initiative.

The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach

For the United Kingdom, the leadership has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but stressing any decision must be "supported by robust research".

Earlier, support grew behind a legislative effort to introduce controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was in the end modified. Instead, the administration vowed to investigate the issue.

Advocacy groups have expressed concerns. One foundation founded by the family of a teenager who was lost after encountering disturbing social media material argues that a strict age ban could fail to make platforms safer and could create a "cliff edge" of harm when users turn 16.

"Australia's ban is a reaction to the inability of the Silicon Valley to design platforms and apps that are safe and fit for young users," commented a influential peer.

The United States: A State-by-State Picture

In the United States, regulation is primarily happening at the local level amid national gridlock.

• Utah requires guardian permission for those under 18 to use social media and restricts late-night use.
• Florida has passed a law barring children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it faces court battles.
• Virginia has approved a law limiting teenagers to one hour of social media use per day, with any further access needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have likewise passed laws mandating adult authorization for under-16s to open social media presences.

Despite widespread concern and calls from some politicians to copy this path, a US-wide ban is presently seen as unlikely.

International Perspectives

Apart from these regions, additional countries are likewise considering moves.

• Malaysia aims to ban social media for under-16s starting from next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

Yet, world bodies strike a more nuanced position. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans carry risks and "might have unintended consequences". The agency notes that the internet can be a "vital connection" for vulnerable young people and that government action should not be a "substitute" for social media firms to prioritize child safeguards.

As this worldwide debate unfolds, the steps of this nation and several other countries show that states internationally are less and less willing to wait for tech companies to make changes on their own.