“Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment and he betrays you instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”
Edmund Burke, Speech to the Electors of Bristol, November 3, 1774
The case of the suspected suicide of the Ghaziabad sisters and many recent incidents abroad compel one to sit up and think about some restrictive measures on the use of social media. True that banning anything, from books to websites, films to theatre performances, may not be a very good idea in a democratic system per se.
But democracy is not just about popularity, public opinion and market trends, as pointed out by thinkers-politicians like Edmund Burke. It is also about protecting the interests of the people despite their grave ignorance. Also, the emerging powers of new technologies are proving to be not just disruptive but also invasive of privacy and personal spaces of individuals, many of them gullible and ignorant.
If one examines the strengths and limitations of social media bans or restrictions imposed on schoolchildren in countries like Australia, it yields valuable insights. One thing is very clear. In the absence of any other practicable and effective measure, restricting kids’ easy access to all social media is increasingly popular. Over 77 percent of Australians have supported the restrictions promulgated since late last year. A survey found that globally, 65 percent of people support banning children under 14 from using social media.
While the narrative around restricting kids' access to social media is evolving worldwide, the measures taken or considered by certain countries are worth understanding. The new Australian law compelled all major social media platforms to block minors under 16 from December 10, 2025. The law provides penalties of up to AU$ 4.95 crore (approximately `317 crore) for companies that do not comply. In the UK, the age of consent for digital activities is 13, but the government is reconsidering raising it to 16. France, Denmark and Greece have almost finalised rules banning children under 16 from accessing social media. The Netherlands and South Korea have regulated cell phone use in classrooms fairly strictly. In the US, while there is no federal ban yet, states like Utah passed regulations while others focus on limiting ‘addictive algorithms’ and mandatory parental consent. In India, a parliamentary standing committee on Education in its 2022 report has already recommended that the government explore making smartphones a licensed device for persons under the age of 16. Very recently, the chief economic adviser too has called for age-based restrictions on social media.
While there is a strong case for at least seriously considering restrictions on access to social media in general and smartphones in particular, many oppose any such bans. Some of them believe that if parents are given the responsibility to decide, where is the guarantee that they will make an informed decision? Others argue that, technologically, it is just impossible to enforce such a ban. They cite examples of using a virtual private network to escape Big Brother surveillance. While a few of these arguments may hold some water, most ‘doubting Thomases’ have plausibly developed a ‘given-up’ mindset.
True, a simplistic approach—this way or that—may not lead us anywhere; countries like India would do well to undertake a structured study of post-restriction societal impact in countries experimenting with restrictions. As it happens, no single family or educational institution can entirely enforce a ban unless there is deep societal understanding and support from law-enforcement authorities. At the same time, if families are unconcerned and callous, no ban could be effectively implemented ensuring the avoidance of addiction. Social media addiction is comparable only to drugs. Experts in behavioural addiction issues largely attribute the phenomenon of social media addiction to the dopamine-inducing social environments that social networking sites provide. Social media platforms produce the same neural circuitry that is seen in those with a gambling addiction and recreational drug users.
Undoubtedly, preventing any addiction is the shared responsibility of both families, communities and the government. And while the share of government is much higher, families cannot outsource this responsibility. Today, sadly a mobile phone is placed in a child's hand as soon as they are born. Grandparents and parents who once told sparrow-and-crow stories have been replaced by mobile phones. Gradually, children don’t just befriend mobile phones; they begin to depend on mobile devices and the internet for everything. There is a need to increase awareness about cyber parenting.
Obviously, cyber parenting or digital parenting is a new phenomenon. It involves preparing children to live a conscious, balanced and enriched life alongside technology. This includes explaining the dangers of the internet to children, helping them reduce excessive screen time and making them realise that while the online world is fascinating, the offline world is equally beautiful—subsequently allowing them to experience it. It also involves making it amply clear to the kids that while looking good is important, being good is more important. Parents who are deeply conscious of both the positive and negative effects of exposure to the cyber world can become good cyber parents.
Parents have to remain alert to ensure that their child does not fall into any form of addiction caused by gaming or the internet. This can happen only when parents are aware, communicative and more importantly, committed. Children's screen time can be effectively restricted only when parents themselves limit their own screen time. Parents along with grandparents and other adult family members with high screen time, often seen playing ‘Candy Crush Saga’, cannot convincingly tell their children not to play games. Apart from removing such contradictions, measures such as introducing age-appropriate gadgets, setting basic rules for smartphone access, seeking children’s consent before using their pictures on social media and raising children's awareness of cyberbullying could also be considered.
However, the most fundamental need is that of courage and conviction on everybody’s part. Surrendering before the onslaught of tech-driven new media is easy. Meeting the challenge resolutely is hard but worth doing.
Vinay Sahasrabuddhe | Senior BJP leader
(Views are personal)
(vinays57@gmail.com)
