The Economic Survey has suggested age-based restrictions on digital media access. The recent deaths of three minors by suicide has also reignited the debate over social media’s adverse effects. Anvitii Rai looks at the current ambit of Indian laws, and explains why outright bans may not be as effective.
What the Economic Survey has suggested
The economic survey 2025-26 flagged the risks of social media addiction among the youth, stating that access was no longer the constraint, and digital addiction can affect mental health. Social media addiction is strongly associated with anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, and cyber-bullying stress, with multiple Indian and global studies confirming its high prevalence among those aged 15-24, it said.
The Survey suggested age-appropriate digital access policies and age-based limits, with platforms made responsible for enforcing age verification and age-appropriate defaults,particularly for social media, gambling apps, auto-play features, and targeted advertising.
Other suggestions include cyber-safety education and digital wellness curricula in schools, parental training on screen-time management, offline youth hubs and community alternatives to digital spaces, and platform accountability for harmful content and design.
Meanwhile, states such as Goa, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, have been examining the plausibility of banning children from accessing social media platforms.
Teens’ vulnerability to social media
First adolescent brains are at the developmental stage when risk-taking behaviours reach their peak, well-being fluctuates, and mental health challenges like depression typically emerge. In early adolescence, when identities and sense of self-worth are forming, brain development is susceptible to social pressures, peer opinions, and comparisons.
Second, platforms are designed to keep users engaged for as long as possible. These include features like endless scrolling (overstimulating the reward centre of the brain), algorithms that tailor feeds to personal tastes, and likes and streaks (social interaction and validation) which are detrimental to the mental health of youngsters.
Currently, Meta and Alphabet are facing a US trial over allegedly deliberately designing their platforms to get children addicted to such platforms.
How other countries are doing it?
Australia’s online safety amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, 2024, bans citizens under 16 years of age from holding accounts on platforms that solely or significantly enable online social interaction between two or more users as well as allow users to interact with some or all other users and post material.
Age verification is to be executed through government ID and face recognition, and the onus of keeping teens off social media has been placed on the platforms themselves, with penalties up to A$49.5 million (approximately $35 million) for companies who fail to comply.
Several European nations such as Italy, France, Portugal and Spain are also mulling similar bans. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez recently described social media platforms as the “Wild West”, while announcing plans to hold platform executives responsible for criminal or harmful content.
A recent survey found that most Polish citizens would support banning social media use for children under 16.
Indian laws and online safety
Currently, this is no blanket ban on adolescents accessing social media platforms. The framework regarding platforms’ accountability and the extent of government intervention is spread across various laws.
The Information Technology Rules, 2021 specify that “intermediaries” enjoy safe harbour from user-generated content, provided that they remove unlawful material once alerted. However, they are required to appoint compliance officers, establish grievance redressal mechanisms, and remove illegal content within strict timelines.
More specific references are made within The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, wherein intermediaries must obtain verifiable parental consent for users under 18, and are prohibited from tracking, behavioural monitoring, or targeted advertising directed at children.
A penalty of up to Rs 200 crore can be imposed for violating children’s data rules, and companies have till mid-2027 to comply with all rules specified. Following the Australian ban on teenagers’ access to social media, the Madras High Court observed that the Centre should consider the same for India, and that parents should be provided a window service to filter what their children can access on social media.
If not bans, then what?
Australia’s landmark law has been challenged in its High Court, and this mirrors the potential problem that India could face should such a ban be imposed. Specifically, the freedom of expression and personal liberty could be quoted. Additionally, child welfare, education, and policing are controlled by states, and enforcement could be uneven.
So far, teenagers in Australia have been able to circumvent the ban by measures like utilising virtual private networks or previously setting up accounts with older ages specified. While evidence of the effectiveness of a ban is sparse, critics have argued that these can be counterproductive, pushing teenagers to unregulated parts of the digital domain.