How to Make Social Media Safer for Children Without Sacrificing Privacy

The debate over raising the minimum age for social media and other online services is gaining momentum. Australia has prohibited children under 16 from creating accounts on certain social media platforms, prompting governments worldwide to consider similar restrictions.

Supporters point to growing evidence that social media can harm adolescents, including exposure to cyberbullying, harmful content, compulsive design features and online exploitation. They also argue that age restrictions could encourage technology companies to develop safer products. Pressure on platforms to improve online safety is already increasing.

Critics, however, warn that mandatory age verification could create serious privacy and cybersecurity risks. Adults may be required to submit sensitive identification documents, while young people could lose access to online communities and opportunities to participate in public life. The right to participate in public life is an important consideration when policymakers evaluate social media bans for minors.

Rather than relying on broad age bans alone, policymakers should consider two complementary approaches: targeted restrictions on harmful platform features and stronger, independently supervised age-verification systems.

This discussion draws on our professional experience at the New York University Center for Business and Human Rights and our combined careers in technology, online safety and public policy. We are also parents, so the consequences of these decisions affect our families directly. Minimum age requirements may continue to evolve, particularly if online platforms fail to meet clear safety standards. Before introducing sweeping age limits, policymakers should pursue practical, evidence-based solutions.

Mariana Olaizola Rosenblatt

Mariana Olaizola Rosenblatt is a technology and legal policy advisor at the New York University Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. Her work examines the governance of online gaming, social media, encrypted messaging and 3D immersive technologies. She previously taught at the University of Chicago Law School and advised international human rights organizations. She earned a JD from Yale University and a BA from Princeton University.

Use targeted restrictions to address specific online harms

Creating a safer internet for children without excessive surveillance is challenging. Human rights law offers a useful framework for evaluating government restrictions: policymakers should ask whether a measure serves a legitimate purpose, whether it is effective and whether a less restrictive alternative could achieve the same result.

Governments should therefore identify the specific harm they want to address before imposing a broad social media ban. Disabling dangerous platform features, improving parental controls and limiting contact between children and unknown adults may be more effective and less intrusive than excluding all young people from an online service.

Online child exploitation is one serious concern. In 2025, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received reports involving 21.3 million suspected cases of online child sexual exploitation. Publicly discoverable profiles, recommendation systems and frictionless direct messaging can make it easier for adults to contact minors. Platforms should limit these risks through stronger privacy defaults, restricted search tools and effective safeguards against grooming.

Cyberbullying is another distinct problem. A 2025 study found that nearly one-third of American teenagers reported experiencing cyberbullying during the previous 30 days. Features such as pseudonymous accounts, unmoderated group chats and the ability to add users without permission can increase the risk. Platforms could reduce these harms by giving children greater control over messages, group invitations and account discoverability.

Age-inappropriate content presents a more complicated challenge. Broad filters can mistakenly block legitimate health, educational or safety information, while sensitive material may affect children differently depending on their age and circumstances. Parents and caregivers may be better positioned than regulators to determine which content categories should be restricted for individual children.

Compulsive social media use is often driven by design choices intended to maximize engagement. Infinite scrolling, autoplay, algorithmic recommendations and variable-reward notifications can encourage users to remain online for extended periods. These patterns affect adults as well as children and also appear in other services, including video games and gaming platforms.

Instead of banning every service used by children, regulators could prohibit the most harmful engagement features or require them to be disabled by default. The New York State Child Safety Act, for example, reflects the idea that certain features should require an adult’s active approval.

Examining each risk separately shows that the problem often lies not with the existence of a platform, but with specific design decisions. Companies can change many of these features without completely removing young people from online communities.

If targeted safeguards fail or companies refuse to comply with defined standards, broader restrictions could be considered. Countries including Indonesia and Canada are among those pursuing measures that require platforms to meet safety standards before children can create accounts.

Build age verification like a high-stakes safety system

Age verification should be developed with the same care used in industries where safety failures can cause serious harm. Construction, food service and pharmaceutical regulation all rely on expert standards, pre-deployment reviews, regular inspections and ongoing government oversight.

Online identity verification follows a similar pattern. Users often cannot determine how companies store, process or delete the identification documents and photographs required to prove age. A security breach could expose people to long-term identity theft and financial losses. In 2025, the Federal Trade Commission recorded 1.3 million identity-theft reports and estimated losses exceeding $15.8 billion.

No single age-verification technology can eliminate every risk. Attackers continually adapt their methods to bypass online protections, so verification systems must be regularly tested, maintained and updated.

Three principles from other high-risk industries could improve online age verification:

1. Independent standards and expert oversight

In sectors such as medicine and construction, expert organizations establish technical standards that government agencies can adopt and enforce. Age-verification technology is relatively new and lacks the same level of institutional support. Governments should invest in standards developed by information-security, internet and web experts through organizations such as ISO, the IETF and the World Wide Web Consortium.

Common standards could also improve compatibility between different approaches developed by technology companies such as Google and Apple. Like building codes, these standards should be reviewed and updated regularly as technology and threats change.

2. Security reviews before deployment

Products in high-risk industries are reviewed before they reach the public. Drugs undergo clinical trials, buildings require certified plans and inspections, and restaurants must meet health requirements. Age-verification providers should face comparable assessments, including architecture reviews, code audits and adversarial security testing.

Social media companies should also undergo independent reviews before deploying age-verification systems. This would help ensure that platforms protect users’ personal information rather than simply shifting privacy risks onto the public.

3. Sustainable funding for enforcement

Government agencies fund specialists and inspectors in industries where commercial activity creates significant public risks. Companies often cover these costs through licensing fees, permits or other charges. Age-verification vendors and social media platforms should similarly pay for initial certification and ongoing oversight, with fees based on the size and reach of their services.

Funding should support trained regulators who can conduct regular audits, investigate security failures and require companies to correct unsafe practices.

Online child safety requires long-term regulation

Protecting children online should be treated as an ongoing public-safety challenge, not as a one-time legislative amendment. Effective policy will require continuous research into children’s behavior, platform design and emerging technologies.

The gradual improvement of automobile safety provides a useful model. Since the 1960s, new technology, regulation and government standards have helped deliver major reductions in pollution and traffic fatalities. A similar long-term approach to online safety could produce meaningful improvements for children and families.

Broad age limits may play a role when platforms fail to meet their responsibilities. However, the strongest strategy is likely to combine targeted restrictions, privacy-preserving age assurance, independent security testing and consistent regulatory oversight. That approach can reduce online harms while preserving young people’s ability to learn, communicate and participate in digital life.

Opinion on Live Science provides insight into important scientific and technology issues affecting people and the world, written by experts and leading researchers.