First Principles IAS · Current affairs
The monthly magazine, July 2026 · Social Issues › Online safety
Printed on · firstprinciplesias.com/current-affairs
Restricting children's social media: the under 16 proposal
LeadPrelims and Mains19 Jul 2026
Why in news
- On 19 July 2026 the Secretary of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology said the Centre was consulting stakeholders on safeguards for children on social media, including a proposal to restrict access for users under 16, and that India was studying what other countries had done before choosing its own approach.
- The statement followed the Prime Minister's remark in Australia that its under 16 ban was "inspiring the world" and that India was "learning a lot" from it.
- Nothing has been decided, but the question has moved from a private member's Bill and two State task forces to the Ministry that would have to write the rule.
Background
- The push began in February 2026, when a member of Parliament from a party allied with the government announced a private member's Bill to bar children under 16 from holding social media accounts, with penalties on platforms of up to ₹250 crore or five per cent of global revenue; Maharashtra set up a task force on social media harms to children and Andhra Pradesh said it was studying the Australian law. The Economic Survey had raised age based restrictions as a question for discussion.
- Australia's Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, passed on 29 November 2024, is the model everyone cites: it took effect in December 2025, the first such law in a democracy, and by mid 2026 reports put the accounts the platforms had disabled or restricted at more than five million.
- India already has one rule on the books. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 treats everyone under 18 as a child and requires a platform to obtain verifiable consent from a parent before processing a child's data, and bars tracking, behavioural monitoring and targeted advertising aimed at children. The Rules of November 2025 say how a parent is to be verified, through identity and age details the platform holds, details the parent gives, or a token from a Digital Locker provider, and give platforms eighteen months to comply.
What the Australian law does
- Platforms must take reasonable steps to prevent anyone under 16 from holding an account; the duty is on the platform, and neither the child nor the parent commits an offence.
- It covers Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X and YouTube; messaging, online gaming, and education and health services are outside it.
- Systemic breaches draw a fine of up to A$49.5 million; in June 2026 the government moved to double it to A$99 million.
- Data collected for an age check must be ring fenced and destroyed once used, and a platform cannot require a government identity or Digital ID as the only means of proof.
| Australia: the account ban | India today: the data law | India proposed | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Law | Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, 2024; in force December 2025 | Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023; Rules of November 2025 | A statement of 19 July 2026; a private member's Bill of February 2026 |
| Age | Under 16 may not hold an account | A child is anyone under 18 | 16 proposed |
| Duty | On the platform: reasonable steps; no offence by child or parent | Verifiable parental consent before a child's data is processed; no tracking or targeted advertising at children | Not decided |
| Reach | Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X, YouTube; not messaging, gaming, education or health | Every data fiduciary; schools, health providers and crèches exempt for defined purposes | Not decided |
| Penalty | Up to A$49.5 million, to be doubled | The Act's penalties, up to ₹250 crore a breach | The Bill proposed ₹250 crore or five per cent of global revenue |
| Method | Age assurance; no government identity as the only route; data destroyed after the check | Parent verified through details held, details given, or a Digital Locker token; eighteen months to comply | Could reuse the data law's verification |
What India would have to decide
- The age: Australia's 16, or the data law's 18, which is already the age at which a platform must have a parent's consent.
- The duty: a ban on accounts, as in Australia, or a duty of care on platforms to design for children, which the European Union's Digital Services Act and the United Kingdom's Online Safety Act prefer.
- The method: the data law's parental verification can be reused for age gating, but it works only if platforms build it, and the eighteen month clock runs to 2027.
- The exclusions: messaging, gaming and education, where Indian children spend as much time as on social media, and where the Australian law does not reach.
- The enforcement: whether a new law, the Information Technology Act or guidelines carry it, and which regulator polices it; the Ministry's consultation in August took up exactly these questions.
Why it matters
- The scale is different from Australia's: Instagram and Facebook each count over 40 crore Indian users, and most of them joined on a self declared birth date no one checked.
- The harms the proposal answers, addiction, exploitation, bullying and sexual abuse material, are documented in India as elsewhere, and on 3 July 2026 the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights issued Meta a notice over paid advertisements linked to child sexual exploitation.
- Against that, a ban on accounts moves children to spaces with less moderation, not fewer screens; it cannot be enforced without age checks that reach every adult user; and a child who needs a helpline or a classroom group needs the platform too.
Analysis
- A sign of seriousness, not a decision. The Secretary's statement opens a consultation; the useful work is to see what a decision would involve.
- India already has an age gate, unbuilt. The data law stops a platform processing a child's data without a verified parent, in substance a gate at 18 for anyone the platform knows to be a child; the gap is that platforms do not yet know, because the verification rules are not yet in force.
- An Australian ban would sit on a system that does not exist yet, so the sensible sequence is to build the verification first.
- Australia chose a ban because it lacked a children's data law; India has one, and the better instrument may be the duty of care the United Kingdom places on platforms, which asks them to design for the children who are there rather than to pretend they are not.
- For a Mains answer: an age limit is a tool, not a policy; the policy question is who bears the duty, the platform, the parent or the State, and how a child is told apart from an adult without turning every Indian user into a document.
The way forward
- Bring the verification provisions of the data rules into force for children's accounts first, ahead of the eighteen month deadline.
- Decide the age and the duty together: if 16, say what happens to the two years between 16 and the data law's 18.
- Put a duty of care on large platforms, with safety by design for the accounts of users under 18 and an audit the regulator can read.
- Count the exclusions: a rule that leaves gaming and messaging untouched leaves most of the harm where it is.
Schemes to know
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (2007, under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005)
- The statutory body that monitors children's rights, including online safety, and that in August 2026 began drafting a social media code of conduct with the Ministry.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and Rules, 2025
- A child is anyone under 18
- Verifiable parental consent is required
- No tracking or targeted advertising at children
- The Rules notified in November 2025 give eighteen months for the consent provisions and exempt schools, health providers and crèches for defined purposes.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
- The law under which child sexual abuse material online is prosecuted
- Its reporting duties on platforms are what the human rights and child rights commissions invoked against Meta in July and August 2026.
Exam lens
- Prelims: Australia's Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, 2024, age 16, in force December 2025, duty on platforms, fine up to A$49.5 million; the DPDP Act's child is under 18, Section 9 on verifiable parental consent; the Rules of November 2025; the NCPCR under the 2005 Act.
- Mains: "An age limit is a tool, not a policy." Discuss the options before India for protecting children on social media, with reference to the Australian ban and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.
Asked before: Mains 2025 GS2 · Mains 2024 GS3 · Mains 2025 GS4
Show the questions
- Mains 2025 GS2: The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has to address the challenges faced by children in the digital era. Examine the existing policies and suggest measures the Commission can initiate to tackle the issue.
- Mains 2024 GS3: Describe the context and salient features of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
- Mains 2025 GS4: In the present digital age, social media has revolutionised our way of communication and interaction. However, it has raised several ethical issues and challenges. Describe the key ethical dilemmas in this regard.
Connects to
- Children's social media: the Ministry's consultation and a code of conduct (Social Issues, August): what the Ministry did next.
- Safe harbour and the Meta takedown (Polity, August): the parliamentary committee's pressure on the same platforms.
- Digital arrest and the money trail (Internal Security, August): the other side of online harm.
Sources
- Telangana Today, 19 July 2026, “Government mulls ban on social media for children under 16”
- ThePrint, 5 February 2026, “India considers curbs on under 16s using social media following Australia's lead”
- Prime Minister of Australia, 29 November 2024, “Social media reforms to protect our kids online pass Parliament”
- Gigazine, 29 June 2026
- DSK Legal, “Legal Update: Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025”
- Inc42, August 2026
- MediaNama, 28 August 2026
Settled facts (dates of Acts, constitutional provisions, standing definitions) are from standard references.
Updated, 20 Aug 2026: Children's social media: the Ministry's consultation and a code of conduct
Filed under: Online safety · The monthly magazine, July 2026