After Australia’s ban on the use of social media by children aged under 16 years, France and the UK are also said to be considering similar restrictions for children.
France is currently debating bills for a similar ban for those under 15 years of age, including one championed by President Emmanuel Macron himself.
French public health watchdog ANSES also ruled last week that social media has numerous detrimental effects for adolescents, particularly girls.
Meanwhile in Britain, 61 MPs on Sunday urged Prime Minister Keir Starmer to implement a ban on social media for young teens, criticising “successive governments” for having done “too little to protect young people from unregulated, addictive social media platforms”.
Starmer has not ruled out a ban, saying “all options are on the table.” The House of Lords is due to vote next week on a Liberal Democrat proposal that would restrict social media platforms using film-style age ratings.
MPs in the House said that “around the world, governments are recognising the severity of the crisis and taking action”, noting Australia’s ban. They said Denmark, France, Norway, New Zealand and Greece are also expected to follow suit, while the UK “risks being left behind” on the issue.
Meanwhile, in compliance with the Australian law, tech companies have already blocked more than 4.7 million accounts belonging to those aged under 16 since the ban came into force last month.
Australia became the first nation to restrict children aged under 16 from using hugely popular and profitable social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Threads and YouTube.
While most parents and children’s rights groups support the ban, opinion is divided on its effectiveness. Those who advocate for a ban agree that urgent action is needed to tackle deteriorating mental health among young people, while opponents demand more robust evidence to support the claims.
Michael Noetel, a researcher at the University of Queensland in Australia, said there is “plenty of evidence that social media does harm to teens”.
He criticised experts demanding an unrealistic level of proof, saying “The potential benefit of a ban is a bet worth making.”
