Vietnam’s proposed social media bans for children would let under-16 users keep their accounts, but strip away the functions that make social media social: posting, commenting and reacting.
That puts Vietnam at the front edge of a sharper global turn. Governments are no longer treating youth social media use as a household-by-household decision. They’re writing age limits, platform duties and parental registration rules into law, according to TechCrunch.
The connecting concern is clear: cyberbullying, compulsive use, mental health pressure, sexual exploitation risks and children’s data. The hard part is everything after the slogan. Every country pushing a youth social media limit runs into the same knot: age checks, privacy, enforcement and speech rights.
Vietnam’s under-16 plan keeps accounts alive but mutes interaction
Vietnam is considering one of the most unusual models so far. A draft decree from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, reported by Reuters and cited by TechCrunch, would allow users under 16 to keep social media accounts while blocking them from posting, commenting or reacting to content.
The accounts would need to be registered under a parent. That parent would be responsible for monitoring what the child accesses and how much time they spend on the platform.
Platforms would also have to deploy technical measures to identify child users and restrict them to age-appropriate content. Times Now, also citing Reuters, reported that platforms would need to provide the highest level of privacy protection for child accounts and proactively detect, warn and block content tied to violence, pornography, gambling, drugs, suicide and other harmful material.
“The primary objective is not to ban or excessively restrict children's access to social media, but rather to ensure that when children use social media services, they are placed in an age-appropriate environment and protected from inappropriate risks.”
That line from Deputy Culture Minister Phan Tam captures the distinction. Vietnam is not proposing a full account ban. It is proposing a participation ban.
The same draft also reaches into gaming. Under-16 users would be capped at 60 minutes a day per game, with the same parental registration requirement used for social media accounts. The decree is not final and could still be revised before adoption.
Australia’s under-16 ban set the benchmark everyone is now measuring against
Australia became the first country to ban social media for children under 16 in December 2025. Its model is harder than Vietnam’s. Children are meant to be kept off covered platforms entirely.
The ban applies to Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch and Kick. It does not include WhatsApp or YouTube Kids.
The burden sits on the companies. The Australian government says platforms must take steps to keep children off their services and cannot rely on users simply typing in their own age. Companies that fail to comply may face penalties of up to $49.5 million AUD ($34.4 million USD).
That makes Australia the clearest test case for social media bans for children. If platforms can enforce the age line without collecting excessive data, other governments will have a template. If enforcement becomes porous or privacy-invasive, critics will have their strongest evidence.
Europe is splitting between outright bans and conditional access
France passed a law on July 21 banning access to social media for anyone under 15. The law could go into effect as soon as September 1. France also plans to ban cell phone use in high schools, extending restrictions already present in primary and middle schools.
Spain is moving toward a ban for children under 16, but the measure still needs parliamentary approval. The Spanish government is also seeking a law that would make social media executives personally accountable for hate speech on their platforms.
Denmark is set to ban social media platforms for children under 15. The government announced in November 2025 that it had secured support from three governing coalition parties and two opposition parties. The plan could become law as soon as mid-2026, according to the Associated Press. Denmark’s digital affairs ministry is also launching a “digital evidence” app with age verification tools that may be used as part of the ban.
The European pattern is not uniform, but the pressure point is the same. Governments want minors out of high-risk feeds or inside tighter age-gated systems. That only works if platforms can reliably know who is a child, who is a parent and whether consent is real.
The wider country list shows how fast the policy copycat cycle is moving
Several countries are now pursuing age thresholds clustered around 14, 15 or 16. The details differ, but the direction is consistent.
| Country | Reported age limit | Status from supplied source |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | Up to 14 | Ban announced in late March, draft legislation expected by June |
| Canada | Under 16 | Digital safety bill introduced in early June, passage could take a year |
| Germany | Under 16 | Proposal discussed by Friedrich Merz’s conservatives, coalition hesitation reported |
| Greece | Under 15 | Ban planned from January 2027 |
| Indonesia | Under 16 | Ban announced in early March for social media and other online platforms |
| Malaysia | Under 16 | Government said in November 2025 it plans to implement a ban this year |
| Poland | Under 15 | Ruling party drafting legislation, Bloomberg reported in February |
| Slovenia | Under 15 | Legislation being drafted |
| Turkey | Under 15 | Bill passed parliament in April, awaits acceptance by Recep Tayyip ErdoÄźan |
| U.K. | Under 16 | Ban announced by Keir Starmer on June 15, possible by spring 2027 |
Greece has tied its planned restriction to anxiety, sleep problems and the addictive design of social media. Indonesia has named platforms including YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Bigo Live and Roblox as an initial focus.
The U.K. plan would apply to platforms including Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal would not be included. The U.K. also plans limits on AI tools, with AI “romantic companion” chatbots required to ensure they are only usable by people over 18.
Related XOOMAR reading for this policy fight: Snap Dodges Social Media Addiction Trial, Meta Left tracks the litigation side of platform responsibility, while Nearly 5 Million Brace for Origin Energy Data Breach is relevant to the privacy anxieties that surface whenever stronger identity checks enter public debate.
The weak point is proving age without building a surveillance machine
Every version of these rules depends on age assurance. That is the technical hinge.
Australia says platforms should use multiple verification methods and cannot trust self-declared ages. Denmark is building a “digital evidence” app with age verification tools. Vietnam would require platforms to identify child users and place them in age-appropriate environments.
The policy trade-off is blunt:
- Stronger checks: Better odds of keeping underage users out or restricting what they can do.
- More data collection: Higher privacy risk for children and adults.
- Platform discretion: More room for narrow compliance if rules are vague.
- Parent registration: More supervision on paper, but enforcement still depends on verification.
Critics, including Amnesty Tech, have argued that bans may be ineffective and ignore the realities of younger generations. Tech Policy Press has also tracked the broader global push, noting that some measures are in effect while others are moving through legislatures, public consultation or courts.
That is the real fight beneath the age limits. Governments can pass bans faster than platforms can prove they can enforce them safely.
The bigger picture
Youth safety is becoming one of the strongest forces in platform regulation. The shift is moving from voluntary safety tools toward legally enforced age gates, age-appropriate content rules and direct obligations for social media companies.
Vietnam matters because it adds a different model to the mix. Australia says under-16 users should be kept off major platforms. Vietnam says they may stay, but without the ability to participate publicly. France, Denmark, the U.K. and others are testing their own thresholds and enforcement designs.
The next phase will decide who controls a young user’s entry point into social media: governments, parents, platforms, app verification systems or some combination of all four. Watch Vietnam’s draft decree for revisions. Its final form could show whether “muted access” becomes a middle path between blanket bans and platform self-policing.
Impact Analysis
- Vietnam’s proposal shows governments are moving beyond parental guidance toward enforceable limits on children’s social media use.
- The plan highlights difficult tradeoffs around age checks, privacy, enforcement and speech rights.
- Platforms could face growing pressure to redesign child accounts with stronger privacy and content-safety controls.
Originally published on XOOMAR. For more news and analysis, visit XOOMAR.
