DIGITAL MEDIA

DIGITAL CURFEW UNDER THE RADAR

Fazmina Imamudeen describes how a social media ban can impact young persons

Meanwhile, Norway is raising its minimum age to 15, and even Sri Lanka is exploring limits for children under 12, citing rising incidents linked to digital platforms.

This global momentum reflects a fundamental shift in how governments are approaching digital childhood. What was once considered a family matter has become a state imperative with legislators worldwide responding to mounting public pressure. The question is no longer whether to act but how to balance protection with practicality.

Different countries are testing various models ranging from outright bans to graduated restrictions and enhanced verification systems, and the world is watching to see which approach proves most effective. The case for intervention draws on mounting evidence linking social media use to adolescent mental health challenges.

Research associates heavy platform use with increased depression, anxiety and sleep disruption among young people.

And the risks extend beyond mental health into direct safety concerns. Cyberbullying, online grooming and exposure to harmful content including material that normalises self-harm are creating genuine dangers for vulnerable adole­scents. Policy makers argue that these aren’t hypothetical concerns and documented harm requires an urgent response.

From this perspective, age limits function as precautionary measures in the face of clear and present risks. And the debate centres not on if harm exists but whether restriction is the appropriate remedy since implementation reveals profound challenges that complicate even well-intentioned policies.

Australia’s ban came into effect without clarity on enforcement mechanisms; it relies on platforms to develop their own verification systems.

Age verification technologies tested by the government showed major limitations including higher error rates for people of colour and certain age groups. Privacy vulnerabilities could enable surveillance, and teenagers can quickly find ways around this through VPNs, borrowed IDs and migration to unregulated platforms.

Within days of the December launch, reports emerged of widespread circumvention.

Privacy advocates warn that effective age verification requires intrusive data collection that potentially exposes minors to greater risks than the platforms themselves. Malaysia’s reliance on government ID systems raises concerns about surveillance and digital exclusion, particularly for youth without formal identification.

Sri Lanka faces similar infrastructure challenges where uneven digital access means that restrictions could protect some children while disadvantaging others. Young people who rely on online spaces for education and connection may find themselves cut off.

Research associates heavy platform use with increased depression, anxiety and sleep disruption among young people

Critics argue that platforms may amplify existing vulnerabilities such as academic pressure, social inequality and limited mental health support, rather than create them independently.

There are also concerns about the unintended consequences for already marginalised young people. LGBTQ+ youth, neurodivergent teens and those in rural areas often depend on online communities for support and connection with peers. Age restrictions may cut them off from vital resources during critical developmental years.

The Digital Freedom Project in Australia has mounted a legal challenge by arguing that the ban violates freedom of communication. Protection for some may mean isolation for others, and raises difficult questions about equity and access.

What emerges isn’t a clear solution but a portrait of policy-making under profound uncertainty.

Governments face anxious parents, fragmented research and rapidly evolving technologies that outpace regulatory frameworks. Therefore, while social media bans offer tangible action, questions about their effectiveness remain.