Australia’s recent bipartisan legislation banning social media for children under 16 has fuelled a global debate about the psychological impact of online platforms on children’s well-being. It is not surprising that the ban has been widely welcomed, as its intention is to shield children from the harmful effects of social media by reducing their exposure to cyberbullying, unrealistic standards and harmful content.
The Australian law may be a global first, but it is not an exception. Take Norway, which is planning to enforce a minimum age limit of 15 for social media use, while France has initiated mobile phone bans in schools on a trial basis.
A 2021 report by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights highlights that approximately 30 percent of children aged 8-18 own smartphones, and 62 percent access the internet via their parents’ phones. About 43 percent have active social media accounts. Research from India shows both the digital divide and disparities in access to digital devices, while also revealing a concerning link between excessive social media use and increasing levels of stress, anxiety, and depression.
Numerous studies, including by the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, have identified tech addiction—particularly involving smartphones, online gaming, and social media—as a significant public health issue. Many adolescents exhibit compulsive behaviour, such as late-night scrolling, which disrupts sleep patterns and adversely affects their mental and physical well-being.
Clearly, social media’s impact on mental health is central to this debate. American social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, in his book The Anxious Generation, identifies a strong correlation between increased screen time and the rise in anxiety, depression, and self-harm among adolescents. Social media platforms, he argues, heighten social comparisons and expose young users to idealised personas, leading to self-esteem issues, particularly for teenage girls.
While the Australian move shows growing concerns over mental health, healthy physical development, digital and privacy rights of children and regulatory challenges, it also raises questions about whether an outright ban is the most effective approach. Its effectiveness depends heavily on enforcement mechanisms. Children often bypass age restrictions by falsifying birth dates. Implementing a strong age-verification system raises concerns about privacy.
More importantly, it may undermine children’s digital rights and learning opportunities. It is important to remember that children have rights, just like adults. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child explicitly recognises these rights, which include the right to express opinions, particularly on decisions that affect them; access to information, especially from the state and media; the ability to share their own ideas and information with others.
Surely, it risks excluding children from the benefits of digital literacy and online collaboration. There are certain benefits of social media platforms when used responsibly. They enable self-expression, promote social connections, and provide access to educational resources. Restricting access completely may limit these opportunities, depriving children of essential skills in an increasingly connected world.
Haidt suggests a ‘whole child’ approach, balancing regulated digital engagement with offline social and physical activities, and equipping children with critical thinking to navigate online spaces. Nations like France offer valuable insights. Its ban on mobiles in schools has improved student focus, increased physical activity, and encouraged interpersonal interactions.
Finland’s digital citizenship curriculum equips children with the skills to navigate online spaces safely. This fosters digital resilience while promoting media literacy, serving as a model for other nations. But beyond government policies, parental guidance and educational interventions play a crucial role.
Parents must engage in open discussions, set boundaries, and encourage children to manage their digital identities thoughtfully. Schools, in collaboration with policymakers, can integrate media literacy programmes to help children critically assess online content and develop healthy habits.
Technology companies too cannot escape their responsibility. Platforms must create “safe mode” options for younger users, featuring curated content, restricted interactions, and mental health resources. Policymakers must actively explore alternative options like frameworks for allowing supervised, limited access to social media. ‘Time windows’ for digital engagement, coupled with content moderation and age-appropriate features, could protect children without isolating them from the digital world. Governments should collaborate with tech companies to design more child-centric digital spaces.
The debate over regulating social media for children underscores the need for nuanced, collaborative solutions. This may be time-consuming, arduous, and appear overly idealistic, but shortcuts like outright bans have never resolved complex social issues. As this concerns children, we must resist the temptation of quick-fixes.
Rather than isolating children from the digital landscape, efforts should focus on empowering them to use technology responsibly. Ultimately, the goal should be to promote a healthier relationship between children and the digital world—one that promotes learning, creativity, and well-being while safeguarding mental health and personal development.
(Views are personal)
Anand Pradhan
Regional Director, Dhenkanal campus, Indian Institute of Mass Communication