Global Social Media Policy for Minors

Within a few months, Canada, France, the UK, and 11 other

nations all decided children under 16 should be banned from social

media. 14 nations, 14 governments, 14 legal

systems, yet one identical policy arriving at

nearly the

exact same time. Forget whether the ban is good.

Maybe it is. My question is deeper.

Why does it look the same everywhere at once?

We're told these governments belong to their peoples.

Ottawa is supposed to answer to Canadians, Westminster to Britons,

Paris to the French. Each is supposed to be steering its own ship,

so why the uniformity? Suppose every nation on its

own decided youth and the screen had become a problem.

You'd expect multiple strategies with different mechanisms,

different thresholds,

and different timelines because that's what self-rule would look

like. But that's not what happened.

Australia passed a ban in December, and within months, France, Britain, and

Canada reached for the exact same one, the same age line,

same enforcement machinery, and same framing about protecting

children.

Denmark, Greece, Austria, and the rest fell in line behind.

It didn't spread like independent nations stumbling towards a shared problem.

Instead, it got implemented like a memo through a

head office.

When a dozen supposedly sovereign nations converge on the

identical policy in the identical window, the decision clearly

wasn't made in any of those countries.

It must have been handed to them. The people of the West are not

being represented. It feels much more like being ministered.