Sanitify IV: Should social media be banned for children?
Have your say.
Dear Friend of Sanity,
A big annual expense for me is paying for Ghost, the ethically run software that I use to host Sanity. It will soon be up for renewal and I'd appreciate your support. If you think my work adds value to your life, please support me from India using UPI: goswami.t@okicici. International readers can send me a one-time contribution here.
Thank you. - Tanmoy
A big annual expense for me is paying for Ghost, the ethically run software that I use to host Sanity. It will soon be up for renewal and I'd appreciate your support. If you think my work adds value to your life, please support me from India using UPI: goswami.t@okicici. International readers can send me a one-time contribution here.
Thank you. - Tanmoy
What happened?
Indonesia announced yesterday that it will ban children under 16 from having accounts on 'high-risk' social media platforms, including TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Bigo Live, and Roblox.
A global wave
- Indonesia is the first Global South country to announce such a ban to protect children from online harm.
- Earlier, Australia had become the first country in the world to require social media platforms to deactivate children's accounts and block children from setting up accounts on them. This came after the country's e-safety commissioner's statement that 50% of boys and 56% of girls faced cyberbullying.
- European nations including Spain, France, Denmark, and Austria are considering similar action. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has said that social media companies can no longer hide behind the excuse that technology is neutral and must be held responsible for the content they platform. French president Emmanuel Macron has also expressed the country's resolve to protect children from digital abuse and has urged India to do the same.
- The Indian state of Karnataka, whose capital Bengaluru is India's preeminent technology hub, has already announced a social media ban for under-16s. Another state, Andhra Pradesh, is working on the same direction for children under 13.
The good and the bad
Speaking to the BBC, Amanda Kusomo, an Indonesian working mother with two children welcomed the move.
- "I don't have much time to constantly monitor what my [teenage] son is doing in the digital world," she said. "With government regulations like this, it really helps ease our worries as parents. I'm confident that the government's decision will ultimately bring positive benefits for both children and parents."
Meanwhile Amanda's 17-year-old son, Matt Joseph, said that the ban had both positives and negatives.
- "It's true that children still can't fully manage their own screen time or control themselves when using their phones," he said. "But if the government chooses to completely block all platforms considered 'risky' for them, I feel there might be a gentler, wiser way to approach it."
- Matt Joseph feels that much of what young people enjoy comes from social media. If the government wants them to use it less, they need an incentive – such as improving what is available to watch on TV. "It would be nice to have entertainment that feels like it's really meant for us," he said, "something that supports learning while still giving us joy."
- Critics of the ban have cautioned that such bans, if not applied thoughtfully, can curtail children's right to information and free expression.
- Others have said that banning anything on the internet is futile because users can easily access sites via virtual private networks (VPN).
- A ban could also push children to unregulated and more harmful corners of the internet.
What do you reckon?
Should social media be banned for children? Reply with your comments and I will publish your thoughts in a future edition.
