BLOCKING children from social media is a badly executed good idea, argues Pieter Arntz, because while the aim is to protect young people, the methods proposed tend to create more problems than they solve. The piece notes that across the world lawmakers are racing to appear active on the issue, with Europe experimenting with a patchwork of age limits and curbs, and Australia moving to a nationwide ban for under-16s that regulators struggle to enforce at scale.
It argues that age‑verification systems are often ill‑suited to this pressure, meaning teenagers can lie about their birth date, borrow someone’s details, or switch to services beyond regulatory reach, resulting in little real impact on the target group. A blunt ban also risks erasing everyday positives of social use, such as homework chats and staying in touch with family, while raising privacy and surveillance concerns through invasive checks. The piece concludes that the real work lies in adults guiding children and setting boundaries, not in outsourcing safety to regulators or platforms.