OPINION — Canada appears ready to follow Australia’s lead with a proposed ban on social media use for children under 16. The idea sounds convincing and it may feel comforting. It gives politicians a positive headline and parents a sense that someone is finally doing something.
The problem is it misses the point.
Social media is not the root issue. The real problem is unrestricted internet access carried around in a child’s pocket every waking hour.
Banning accounts on major platforms doesn’t remove the phone, the constant stream of content, messages, videos, group chats, gaming platforms and algorithm-driven distractions. It simply pushes kids elsewhere, often to spaces that are harder to monitor and less regulated.
Australia’s law puts the onus on social media companies to block under-16 users. That sounds tough until you look at how the internet works. Age verification online is notoriously weak. Kids already lie about their birthdates. VPNs exist. Smaller platforms thrive in regulatory blind spots. Messaging apps and video platforms remain untouched. Kids are smart and will find work-arounds.
A smartphone is not a neutral object for a developing brain. It is a high-powered device designed to demand attention, reward engagement and eliminate boredom. For some parents, it’s a babysitter, and at night, it sits on a nightstand when the kid is asleep. It vibrates during class. It pings during dinner. It fills every quiet moment.
It’s the constant connectivity, not a single app, that is reshaping childhood.
If a phone didn’t offer unlimited internet access, many kids wouldn’t want one at all. Strip away social media, video platforms, games and constant group chats, and the device becomes what it once was: a phone, not a status symbol. That alone should tell us where the real problem lies. Children are not addicted to phones. They are responding to systems designed to capture attention.
If the goal is to protect kids, then the conversation needs to be more honest. Limiting children to basic phones that allow calling and texting trusted contacts might address the problem. It preserves safety and communication without opening the door to an unfiltered internet.
This is not a radical idea. It is how childhood worked for decades.
Critics will argue this infringes on choice, creates inequities or feels unrealistic. Fair points. A full ban would be heavy-handed and difficult to enforce. Canada is not Australia.
But there is a middle ground that goes far beyond banning an app.
Governments can require default age-appropriate settings on devices sold for minors to use. Schools can deliver meaningful digital literacy before kids are handed unrestricted access. Regulators can target design practices that intentionally exploit attention and habit formation. Carriers and manufacturers can be pushed to make parental controls usable.
Those steps deal with the system, not the symptom.
A social media ban makes adults feel proactive and gives the impression of control. What it does not do is teach kids how to live in a digital world they will eventually have to navigate on their own.
We should stop pretending this is about one app or one platform. It is about a device that never sleeps, never stops asking for attention and arrives in children’s hands long before they are able to manage it.
If we are serious about protecting kids, let’s talk about the elephant.
Read more articles and opinions by Laurie Weir.
