Australia's decision to ban social media access for children under the age of 16, effective from December 10, has triggered a fierce international discussion. The policy forces a critical examination of adolescent safety, digital freedoms, and the very nature of growing up online. However, researchers caution that the move is racing ahead of concrete scientific evidence.
Experts Divided: Safety vs. Secrecy and Expression
Dr Clare Southerton from Monash University's School of Education Culture & Society points out that research has not yet established a clear link between age-based bans and a reduction in harm to young people. She emphasises that for many, especially vulnerable youth, social platforms provide crucial support networks. Her advice leans towards communication over prohibition: "Take their feelings seriously. Don’t dismiss them. Build trust so they come to you when something unsafe happens."
The legal perspective highlights constitutional concerns. Calcutta High Court advocate Subhadip Choudhuri argues that a blanket ban "conflicts with freedom of expression" and suggests that smarter, more nuanced regulation would be more effective.
Security experts warn of unintended consequences. Kaushal Bheda, director of Pelorus Technologies, cautions that bans may simply drive teenagers to use VPNs and migrate to less regulated online spaces, potentially increasing risk. This sentiment is echoed by mental health professionals. Psychiatrist Dr Neetu Tiwari states that prohibition often "breeds secrecy, not safety," while educator Anamika Dasgupta of The Wonder School Pune fears increased loneliness if the ban is not paired with strong community support.
Some see potential benefits. Psychologist and activist Dr Malini Saba notes that reduced screen time can improve sleep, emotional regulation, and attention—but only if it is not framed as a punishment.
A Culture, Not Just an App: The Teen Perspective
Marketers and sociologists argue the ban misunderstands the integral role of digital spaces in modern adolescence. Suyash Lahoti of Wit & Chai Group states bluntly: "Asking teenagers to quit Instagram is like asking millennials to abandon electricity. Social media is where they date, debate, dream and discover careers — it’s a culture, not just entertainment."
Parents and students present a balanced view. Parent and teacher Subha Mukherjee Raha notes that impressionable teens can be exposed to cyberbullying, making guidance key. Another parent, Susmita Bera, advocates for balanced rules like fixed timings instead of a complete ban, citing health issues from late-night browsing.
Kolkata-based student Samriddhi Mukhopadhyay captures the duality: "Social media has two effects. While it helps in long-distance communication, exploring new ideas, and seeking study support, it also affects mental health, leads to body-shaming, distraction, and sleep disruption." Kaushal Bheda adds that sophisticated algorithms can learn teen triggers and behaviours, making them susceptible to disinformation and 'cognitive warfare'.
Indian Context: Enforcement Nightmare and Classroom Impact
Indian educators predict mixed results if a similar ban were attempted here. Alka Kapur, Principal of Modern Public School, Shalimar Bagh, says it might reduce distraction but warns "enforcement would be next to impossible." She also highlights the loss of academic benefits from online collaboration. Child psychologist Ambika Chawla of Lissun sees a potential creative upside: less digital noise could foster more real-world thinking.
The enforcement challenge is paramount. Ankush Tiwari, CEO of pi-labs, asserts that practical implementation will make or break such a law. Tech-savvy teens can easily pose as adults. Some platforms, like Snapchat, are adopting systems like ConnectID, which uses bank-verified details for age checks without exposing personal data. "It’s far harder to fake a bank-verified age," Tiwari says, but loopholes remain likely.
The debate extends to gaming, a major social channel. Roby John, CEO of SuperGaming, notes that with 618 million under-18 online gamers in the US alone (per Statista), companies are actively designing safer systems.
Global Trend: Tightening Rules Without Consensus
Australia is not alone. Nations across Europe and Asia are introducing age checks, raising minimum ages, and curbing device use in schools, yet a consensus on balancing protection with teen autonomy remains elusive.
Singapore offers a preview of stricter measures. From January 2026, secondary school students will be barred from using smartphones and smartwatches outside lesson time, including during recess and enrichment classes. Devices must be stored in lockers, with smartwatches included due to their messaging capabilities. The Ministry of Education (MOE) reports that early-adopter schools saw "improved student well-being, enhanced focus, and more physical interaction." Personal learning devices will also enter a sleep mode from 10.30 pm to 6.30 am to encourage earlier sleep.
Even tech leaders like Elon Musk have voiced concerns, comparing addictive social media content to a drug and urging parents to limit exposure to "dopamine-maximising AI."
How to Help Teens Without an Outright Ban:
- Educate teens about algorithms, validation loops, and influencer culture.
- Set daily or weekly screen-time limits instead of complete cuts.
- Monitor content while keeping communication channels open.
- Build a strong home ecosystem with sleep routines, physical activity, and family time.
(Inputs by Suyash Lahoti and BG Girish Chandra, medical director & chief psychiatrist at Maarga Mindcare, Bengaluru)
