🔗 Share this article Could Other States Pursue Australia's Example in Restricting Online Networks for Teenagers Under 16? Australia's bold policy to ban social platforms access for those under 16 is sparking debate around the globe. Lawmakers, child protection groups, and families are watching intently to see if this approach will become a template for the rest of the world. Across Europe Momentum Throughout Europe, a increasing number of countries are exploring similar measures. The Danish government has stated a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the PM stating that mobile devices and apps are "robbing our children's innocence". A law is expected to be enacted soon. Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, citing the need to shield the young from the "influence of the AI". Ireland is working on a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media participants. The media minister have stated that an Australian-model ban remains "a potential options on the table". In Spain, the president has asked lawmakers to pass a proposal raising the legal age for accessing social media to 16. In The French government, the leader has threatened a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar step, including an overnight "digital curfew" for older teenagers. The government in The Netherlands has urged parents to block their youngsters from social media before 15. Across the European Union, the European parliament has passed a advisory resolution demanding a ban for teenagers under 16 unless a parent decides otherwise is granted. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these services, the move does not create binding law. "A strong age restriction is a solid starting point," stated one MEP supporting the measure. The United Kingdom: An Evidence-Based Eye In the UK, the leadership has kept open a possible ban, arguing that "nothing is off the table" but insisting any action must be "supported by conclusive evidence". Last year, momentum gathered behind a legislative effort to impose restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually weakened. However, the administration pledged to investigate the matter. Campaign organizations have raised concerns. One foundation established by the relatives of a young person who was lost after being exposed to disturbing platform posts argues that a blanket age ban might not make platforms safer and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when teens turn 16. "The Australian ban is a answer to the failure of the tech sector to build tools that are safe and age appropriate for minors," stated a leading online safety campaigner. The United States: A Fragmented Landscape In the United States, regulation is primarily unfolding at the regional government level against a backdrop of country-wide inaction. Utah mandates adult approval for under-18s to use social media and limits nighttime use. The state of Florida has signed a bill prohibiting children under fourteen from joining social media, though it is subject to legal challenges. Virginia has passed a law restricting under-16s to one hour of social media use per day, with any further use dependent on parental permission. Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have likewise introduced laws mandating adult authorization for under-16s to set up social media accounts. Despite bipartisan support and suggestions from some politicians to follow this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as a distant prospect. International Views Beyond Europe and the US, other states are likewise exploring options. Malaysia plans to restrict social media for under-16s beginning next year. Brazil has lifted the access age for Instagram to 16. But, global bodies adopt a more nuanced position. Unicef has advised that social media bans pose dangers and "may even have unintended consequences". The body notes that the internet can be a "lifeline" for vulnerable children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for platform operators to invest in safety. While this international debate continues, the actions of this nation and several other countries show that policymakers globally are less and less willing to delay for the industry to act voluntarily.