France just voted to ban kids under 15 from social media, but Australia's ban shows how hard that is to enforce

[Endymio]

Many of my trips to other countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark) went through Lille. I'd stop in Tolouse and Nice on the way ... And as a bonus, here's a few receipts: link

As impressive as that itinerary is, a European visiting other countries in Europe is like a New Yorker visiting other US states. My experience in France is admittedly limited: excluding a couple layovers at de Gaulle, it's a few weeks while waiting for my visa to the US, and a second trip, 20+ years later, when I had to testify in a patent hearing, and was later mugged in the 18th Arrondissement.

Still, I have family and friends scattered elsewhere in Europe, and I'm confident my time there exceeds yours in the US by orders of magnitude. Anyone who denies the French -- and many of their continental neighbors -- are parochial is fooling themselves. I will exclude Germany. Wherever I've traveled, whether the streets of Vientiane or an Amazonian riverboat in Belem, there's always been a couple German backpackers present: usually inebriated, but always courteous, convivial, and willing to see other cultures.

The difference between the US and Europe is best summed up as such: when a US resident has a great idea, they start a business and get rich. When a European has a great idea, they move to the US -- then start that business.

 

[yRaz]

As impressive as that itinerary is, a European visiting other countries in Europe is like a New Yorker visiting other US states. My experience in France is admittedly limited: excluding a couple layovers at de Gaulle, it's a few weeks while waiting for my visa to the US, and a second trip, 20+ years later, when I had to testify in a patent hearing, and was later mugged in the 18th Arrondissement.

Still, I have family and friends scattered elsewhere in Europe, and I'm confident my time there exceeds your first-hand knowledge of the US by multiple orders of magnitude. Anyone who denies the French -- and many of their continental neighbors -- are intensely parochial is fooling themselves. From that I will exclude Germany. Wherever I've traveled, whether the streets of Vientiane or an Amazonian riverboat in Belem, there's always been a couple German backpackers present: usually inebriated, but always courteous, convivial, and willing to see other cultures.

The difference between the US and Europe is best summed up as such: when a US resident has a great idea, they start a business and get rich. When a European has a great idea, they move to the US -- then start that business.

 

[poshflamingos]

Anyone who denies the French -- and many of their continental neighbors -- are parochial is fooling themselves.

That has not been my experience at all here. Different generations may have had something to do with it. My experience was mostly with people my age (20-something when I was studying in England, 30-something now) and pretty much everyone I interacted with had an international/multicultural outlook, traveled/had friends abroad, spoke multiple languages, etc. That includes the all french I had contact with, like my airbnb hosts, people I met on trains/buses, roommates and friends of that friend in Nantes, my one french classmate in England, etc. I would never had though of describing the people I personally met in the EU as "parochial".

The difference between the US and Europe is best summed up as such: when a US resident has a great idea, they start a business and get rich. When a European has a great idea, they move to the US -- then start that business.

That's another thing americans do that is funny to me, they praise the US for things that don't affect the lives of >99% of people. Saying the US is better because it's a better place to become rich by opening a business is like saying "the US is better because we put a man on the moon".

Maybe it's just me, but I would put it differently, to me the difference between the US and Europe is best summed up by the welfare safety nets, universal healthcare, walkable cities, great public transport, generous worker's rights, free university education/no student debt, healthier food, business regulations that favour consumers (including privacy/GDPR), no monthly school shootings, higher trust societies, and many other such ways in which life is significantly better in Europe for the average working-class person. That difference in culture ("our country is great because of how well we treat the rich" vs "our country is great because of how well we treat the poor", individualism vs collectivism, and so on) is exactly why I chose the EU over the US when I decided to immigrate.

 

[poshflamingos]

US's insane drinking laws? Fact: alcohol is extremely damaging to your health.

You know what else is damaging to your health? Guns. High fructose corn syrup. Red 40. Working more than 40 hours per week. Being hit by a giant SUV.

I wouldn't be inclined to think anything the US does is for the benefit of your health.

 

[yRaz]

You know what else is damaging to your health? Guns. High fructose corn syrup. Red 40. Working more than 40 hours per week. Being hit by a giant SUV.

I wouldn't be inclined to think anything the US does is for the benefit of your health.

The worst thing about the gun problem in the US is we could solve most of it by giving people universal health care, making mental health treatment more accessible and ruining people's lives for trying to access it. If I was ever diagnosed with a mental health condition I would lose my security clearance and my job with it.

 

[poshflamingos]

we could solve most of the gun it by giving people universal health care, making mental health treatment more accessible

But that's socialism

 

[yRaz]

But that's socialism

So are roads.

 

[onebignerd]

"...establishes that social media is not harmless, arguing it causes children to read less, sleep less, and compare themselves to others more."

Same arguments used against television in the '70s and '80s, then it was arcades and video game consoles and walk-man portable tape players making kids violent and anti social. Even later with iPods. Now it is people glued to their cell phones. In some countries they have had to put railroad\commuter rail crossing lights on the GROUND so people do not walk onto or off the loading platform onto the tracks, because they won't\can't look up from their phones!!

Human habit and behavior is the problem, NOT any media or technology!!

 

[Endymio]

Yeah, god forbid someone under 21 drinks or posts on the internet because "thEy arE nOt mAtuRe enOugH", but it's totally fine and mature to drive at 16 and shoot people at 18. Mhm, yeah, drinking totally equates to posting on the internet

Every medical body on the planet agrees that alcohol is devastating to young developing brains, and a growing body of research says the same for social media, albeit for different reasons. We don't need any science denialism here.

The most amusing thing about ill-considered posts like yours is that Europe is following the US lead here. France, for instance, recently lowered the age to drive from 18 to 17, nearly matching the US, while a decade or two earlier, they (finally) set a minimum age of 18 to be served alcohol.

As for "shooting people at age 18", Switzerland issues most male teenagers an assault rifle during mandatory conscription at age 18 -- a rifle they generally keep at home when not on duty, and one they're allowed to purchase and retain after leaving service.

The worst thing about the gun problem in the US is we could solve most of it by giving people universal health care, making mental health treatment more accessible

Universal healthcare wouldn't do a thing to reduce violence, much less "gun" violence. Civil internment of dangerous mental health patients would help drastically ... but that was eliminated by a series of court rulings in the 1970s, by the most liberal Supreme Court in modern history. As a result, within 10 years, most of the asylums in the US closed, and we're no longer allowed to force people into treatment until they kill or seriously injure someone.

 

[yRaz]

Every medical body on the planet agrees that alcohol is devastating to young developing brains, and a growing body of research says the same for social media, albeit for different reasons. We don't need any science denialism here.

The most amusing thing about ill-considered posts like yours is that Europe is following the US lead here. France, for instance, recently lowered the age to drive from 18 to 17, nearly matching the US, while a decade or two earlier, they (finally) set a minimum age of 18 to be served alcohol.

As for "shooting people at age 18", Switzerland issues most male teenagers an assault rifle during mandatory conscription at age 18 -- a rifle they generally keep at home when not on duty, and one they're allowed to purchase and retain after leaving service.


Universal healthcare wouldn't do a thing to reduce violence, much less "gun" violence. Civil internment of dangerous mental health patients would help drastically ... but that was eliminated by a series of court rulings in the 1970s, by the most liberal Supreme Court in modern history. As a result, within 10 years, most of the asylums in the US closed, and we're no longer allowed to force people into treatment until they kill or seriously injure someone.

 

[Endymio]

(photo deleted)

I see you've abandoned all attempts to argue rationally, and are instead using an entirely different tactic:

".The Chewbacca defense is a legal strategy that relies on intentionally confusing and distracting the jury rather than providing a substantive rebuttal. By introducing absurdities and irrelevant information, the goal is to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of jurors..."

 

[yRaz]

I see you've abandoned all attempts to argue rationally, and are instead using an entirely different tactic:

".The Chewbacca defense is a legal strategy that relies on intentionally confusing and distracting the jury rather than providing a substantive rebuttal. By introducing absurdities and irrelevant information, the goal is to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of jurors..."

 

[Draconian]

Baby steps towards governments eventually banning VPNs in the name of "protecting kids."

 

[Axeia]

France plans to restrict VPNs to close that loophole, too

Call me a skeptic but imo that would be the real reason. Crack down on people getting around things with VPNs by using the good old 'think of the children'.

I'm all for setting a minimum age requirement for harmful social media but blanket banning all social media prevents access to very useful information on for example YouTube. I used to watch a ton of discovery / national geographic as a kid, I would have loved access to some of the stuff that's on YouTube nowadays back then. Highly educational, but admittedly there's also plenty of misinformation (reuploads of TikToks) and influencers that haven't contributed a single useful thing in their life (Jake Paul for example).

But the bigger issue imo is that they all try to implement it in highly ineffective ways where it simply doesn't do what they're supposedly trying to achieve will making it a massive privacy invasion for everyone else. I don't want to hand over my private information or upload selfies to a bunch of companies tyvm. I'd much rather have the government create a non-identifiable (for the social media platforms) token on request based on say my national ID. Let the government(s) handle the age verification and require the platforms to make it mandatory for access.

 

[ViPeRGT2]

Australia became the first country in the world to attempt such a ban, in December 2025, but recent studies cast doubt on its effectiveness. Australia's eSafety Commissioner found that roughly seven in ten children who held social media accounts before the ban took effect still retained them three months later, and a study published in the British Medical Journal put the figure as high as 85%.

As an Australian parent, I agree it probably hasn't helped with the kids that already had social media, telling kids they now can't have something they already have, they will find ways around it.

But, it has certainly helped curtail those that don't already have it. As we're able to say, 'Sorry, you can't get a social media account as it's against the law.' and they don't know what they're missing.

 

[Northy]

I'm happy to see more bans coming in against social media. The sht is toxic, children deserve to be protected, and it needs to be pushed back against in every way possible.

The days of it being "a nice way to stay in touch with family and friends and share pictures" are long gone.

 

[Etoyo]

Hello, I'm French, and I support this law.

Smartphones and social media are, in my opinion, the most damaging addiction affecting children—yet they're also the most socially accepted. It saddens me to see so many kids with their heads buried in screens. They're constantly connected, but they're missing out on real life.

You mention alcohol, but the situation is different, this is not a (massive) problem in our country. There are constant public campaigns warning about alcohol, and if a young child were caught drinking, adults would step in immediately.

This law won't be easy to enforce, but its mere existence can already help transform society by changing what we consider normal and acceptable.

 

[toooooot]

If all the platforms are banned, how can children learn about societal issues that they will very soon be dealing with? Will they be left with the official new outlets that see no issue pretending that certain very serious problems do not exist? The thing is, a % of teens shows interest to what is happening around them and want to know the meaning of it. If the rules are enforced, they can only rely on good parents who would open the window for them to see the world as it is.
But as for the rest, they will be left with the information from public schools.
Idk about France, but USA schools are infested with progressive activists who put in children's minds outright harmful ideas. Imagine a reality where those are the ones who sketch the structure, the reality children will accept in the absence of actual reality.
There is no doubt that social platforms do a lot of harm to children. It is a real problem that has become really hard to ignore.
Social platforms are like a swamp that ruins young minds. But at the same time, the swamp has tools that conscious ones need to form their personal opinion and not become a victim of propaganda and lies.
Look at certain countries in Europe. The thing that their government call a blessing literally made entire cities unlivable, people got used to crime as an inseparable part of their lives. I do not want millions of young people looking at the problem and think that it is a good thing because that is how they were taught in schools and lacked any other sources to hear rational people spelling the truth. I do not a reality where kids will grow up afraid to say important things because they were taught that only a horrible person could say them.
Banning social platforms is the greatest opportunity for those who want to hide the problems from the growing generation. And the biggest prey are every child whose single mother or grandma does not care about. Those will become perfect soldiers of progressive ideology. People that see white and say it is black because they were taught so for so long that there is not even a tiny doubt in their mind.

Putting propaganda in children's minds became a lot easier. And as other countries follow, we will have a lot of people who believe in the wrong things, make wrong decisions which will make the life of everyone in the country worse. Look at the "worse" that previous gen has created. They lie about it, saying it is that blessing which they like to repeat so often. They cannot tell the truth because they brought it on the nation. And they will keep teaching children that what they did was good and that they should do the same.