🔗 Share this article Might Additional Nations Pursue Australia's in Restricting Online Networks for Teenagers Under 16? Australia's controversial action to prohibit social media access for those under 16 is sending ripples around the globe. Officials, safety advocates, and families are observing with great interest to see if this tactic will become a template for countries abroad. The European Momentum In Europe, a rising group of nations are considering similar bans. Denmark has announced a restriction on social media for youth below 15, with the prime minister declaring that smartphones and networks are "robbing our children's youth". Legislation could be passed next year. Norway is preparing to implement a access barrier of 15, pointing to the need to shield the young from the "power of the recommendation systems". Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media account holders. Officials have stated that an similar ban is "an tools on the table". In Spain, the president has urged parliament to pass a law raising the minimum age for joining social media to 16. In The French government, the president has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a legislative committee has endorsed a similar step, alongside an overnight "digital curfew" for 15- to 18-year-olds. The government in the Netherlands has recommended families to prevent their children from social media up to the age of 15. At the EU level, the bloc's legislature has adopted a symbolic statement calling for a ban for teenagers under 16 unless parental consent is granted. Even though it warns of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not establish mandatory rules. "An effective age barrier is a good foundation," said a leading MEP driving the initiative. The UK: An Evidence-Based Approach In the UK, the government has kept open a possible ban, emphasizing that "no measure is discarded" but insisting any policy must be "based on robust evidence". Earlier, support gathered behind a bill to introduce restrictions on social media use by under-16s, but it was in the end weakened. However, the administration vowed to further research the topic. Advocacy groups have raised concerns. An organization established by the family of a young person who died after encountering harmful online content argues that a simple age ban could fail to improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of risk when teens reach the legal age. "Australia's ban is a reaction to the failure of the Silicon Valley to build tools that are secure and age appropriate for children," said a prominent child protection advocate. America: A Decentralized Landscape Stateside, action is largely occurring at the regional government level against a backdrop of country-wide gridlock. Utah mandates guardian permission for under-18s to use social media and limits overnight use. The state of Florida has enacted a bill barring under-14s from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles. Virginia has passed a regulation restricting minors to one hour of social media time per day, with extra access dependent on a guardian's okay. Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana have similarly passed measures requiring parental consent for teenagers to create social media profiles. Even with cross-party agreement and proposals from some figures to mimic this example, a nationwide ban is presently seen as unlikely. International Perspectives Apart from these regions, additional nations are similarly taking action. Malaysia plans to prohibit social media for those under sixteen effective next year. Brazil has increased the access age for Instagram to 16. Yet, global bodies strike a more cautious tone. Unicef has cautioned that blanket prohibitions carry risks and "might prove counterproductive". The organization highlights that the internet can be a "vital connection" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "replacement" for tech companies to prioritize user protection. Even as this international debate unfolds, the actions of the Australian government and others show that states around the world are no longer content to delay for platforms to act voluntarily.