Putting the burden on tech giants
The Philippines may soon join the growing list of countries that have imposed social media bans on minors after the Senate passed Senate Bill No. 2424, or the proposed Safe Media Access and Responsible Technology for Kids in Digital Spaces (Smart Kids) Act, on third and final reading this week.
The measure is seen as a response to the growing public concern following three school shooting incidents in the country that authorities linked to harmful online content and which resulted in several deaths and injuries.
Once enacted, platforms will be required to implement age-assurance mechanisms to prevent minors from creating accounts. The measure also paves the way for the suspension, restriction, disabling, or removal of any account that has been reasonably determined to be owned or used by a minor.
Other countries that have imposed varying forms of social media bans are Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, and Malaysia, with the United Kingdom, Turkey, and Greece planning to pass similar measures within the year.
Root causes of violence
But is a ban the right solution?
The recent report that authorities have foiled 53 school shootings being planned in South Cotabato right after the Sept. 18 shooting at Banga National High School may be used as a justification for a blanket ban. Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla said over 50 people in Banga municipality who were involved in making online threats or “grooming” were arrested.
But advocacy groups have warned against the measure.
Child Rights Network Philippines has strongly opposed a blanket social media ban, arguing that while protecting children online is necessary, simply taking away their access is not the solution.
Philippine Mental Health Association Inc. shared this sentiment and pointed out that a ban ignores root causes of youth violence. It noted that keeping the youth safe online and preventing violence require a comprehensive approach that incorporates mental health support, safe school environments, responsible online platforms, and early identification and intervention.
Both groups have instead called for putting greater accountability on tech platforms to eliminate predatory designs and manage harmful content.
Modern life
Last May, the United Nations Human Rights Office already made a similar warning: blocking children from social media is no substitute for making platforms safe in the first place. It issued a 10-point framework that includes requiring platforms to make digital environments safer by design, rather than placing the burden on children and parents; and targeting age-based restrictions to specific services or content, such as pornography, gambling, artificial intelligence chatbots, or addictive design features.
This was also among the points made by Sen. Risa Hontiveros, the only senator among 17 who voted against SB 2424.
She said an under-15 age threshold will be a good baseline, arguing that this is the voting age for the Sangguniang Kabataan as well as the minimum legal age for employment. She warned that setting the limit at under-18 could result in the youth finding ways to circumvent the law. She cited Australia, whose internet regulator recently revealed that more than eight in 10 young teens and preteens continued to use social media platforms despite the prohibition for children under 16.
Hontiveros’ arguments must be considered given how social media is already embedded in modern life. She cited the value and benefits it gives to minors by providing them a platform for livelihood, a means to communicate with family, and build communities.
She made a good point about educating the youth instead on how to navigate the digital world, including social media and the dark web.
Freedom of expression
“Our children need to understand how algorithms work, how their data [are] collected, how misinformation spreads, how grooming operates, how to recognize exploitation and scams, how to respond to cyberbullying, and how to report abuse,” Hontiveros said. “These are now considered essential life skills; navigating the digital world has become a necessity, and we should prepare them to do so with their security in mind.”
There is more than enough time for lawmakers to carefully craft a measure to protect children from the dark side of the internet. A similar measure, which passed the committee level in the House of Representatives last month, shifted away from a blanket social media ban and leaned toward “safety by design” and “safety by default” measures.
The burden of making the digital world safe must be ultimately placed on tech giants and social media platforms by holding them more accountable and forcing them to build safety mechanisms into their systems and business models. Protecting children online need not take away their right to information and diminish their digital rights.
