Opinion: Is Congress' Proposed Social Media Ban Just a Case of 'gaya-gaya'?

Australia’s decision to impose one of the world’s strictest age-based restrictions to protect minors from online harm has become a reference point for other countries, including the Philippines.

This radical move seems vindicated by a recent court ruling in the United States that social media is harmful to children. Pertinently, a recent survey in Australia shows that some parents have observed “positive behavioural shifts” in their children since the enforcement of the social media ban.

ALSO READ:

At the Threshold: The House's Role in Initiating Impeachment

Opinion: On The Need to Fortify Pathways to Public Office

At first glance, adopting a proven policy from another country appears practical. However, public policy or legislation cannot simply be transplanted from one jurisdiction to another without careful consideration of local conditions, social realities, and empirical evidence. While Australia’s law was designed to address concrete harms observed in its own society, the Philippines faces a different social landscape and distinct youth problems

Notably, the very first social media ban bill filed in the Senate cited a UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) study on the social media exposure of children. Perils and Possibilities: Growing up online is essentially a global survey documenting the dangers faced by children all over the world navigating social media. It is definitely a sobering read for reform advocates concerned about online safety.

But interestingly, according to the former UNICEF representative in the Philippines in Philippines Kids Online: The Online Experiences of Children in the Philippines: Opportunities, Risks and Barriers, the foregoing global study notwithstanding, information regarding social media impact on Filipino children “remains to be limited; available data on reported incidents is not sufficiently analyzed; and available services are fragmented and unresponsive to the specific needs of children”.

Crucially, this report states, “The vast majority of children mostly have a good time online, despite the fact that most children do not believe that there is a lot of good things for children their age online. This suggests that while children enjoy being online, they are well aware of much of the content that is deemed inappropriate or negative that exists in the digital space, and would generally prefer more positive, age appropriate content that is suitable for them”.

Additionally, it also reveals that, “Children most frequently go online to connect to others, ranging from friends and family who are overseas, to friends and peers that are within their immediate or close network”. So, a social media ban for kids in the Philippines may have consequential adverse impacts on their social development. It may isolate them from friends and family in a way that Australian children may not experience under their ban.

It is likewise worth emphasizing that Australia’s social media restrictions did not emerge in a vacuum. They followed years of public debate, parliamentary inquiries, and empirical research documenting the negative effects of social media on young people. Studies involving large cohorts of Australian teenagers found correlations between heavy social media use and reduced life satisfaction, particularly among adolescent girls.

Importantly, the law underwent multiple rounds of consultation with technology companies, educators, mental-health professionals, and civil society groups before being enacted. This process highlighted potential enforcement challenges, privacy concerns, and unintended consequences, which lawmakers attempted—though not always successfully—to address.

And even with this extensive public deliberation, the Australian approach has encountered practical difficulties. Questions remain about age-verification systems, data privacy, enforcement mechanisms, and whether bans merely drive teenagers toward unregulated or underground platforms. These uncertainties demonstrate that even well-researched legislation can struggle during implementation.

While online perils are real, the reality is the Philippines already faces more clearly documented social problems affecting young people, such as early pregnancy, school dropout, and poor literacy outcomes. For instance, research shows that teenage pregnancy is strongly associated with school discontinuation, with early childbearing significantly reducing the likelihood of completing education. This is also a criminal matter given that mostly adult males are impregnating these girls.

These intergenerational concerns are rooted in structural factors—poverty, limited access to reproductive health education, and inadequate school support systems. None of these problems would be solved by restricting access to social media. Indeed, digital platforms sometimes provide young people with access to educational content, peer support networks, and information about health and employment opportunities.

This does not mean that Filipino children are immune to online harm. Cyberbullying, misinformation, and exposure to inappropriate content remain real risks. However, the existence of risk does not automatically justify a ban. Effective regulation should be proportionate to demonstrated harm. Measures such as digital literacy education, parental control tools, platform accountability, and targeted interventions for at-risk youth may provide more balanced solutions.

And if copying from other countries is truly unavoidable, then the Philippines should instead learn from Finland’s media and information literacy (MIL) approach, which is actually considered the international benchmark. Finland considers MIL as an integral component of civics education which starts in kindergarten where kids are taught how to deal with online dangers. Most importantly, full government support for MIL programs is guaranteed by law.

Taiwan also teaches valuable lessons with their MIL approach, especially given that the extent of their society’s platformization is very similar to the Philippines. First, MIL is firmly set as a core value in the Taiwan education curriculum. The unquestioned objective is to ensure a well-informed and digital-savvy citizenry in the internet age. Second, MIL is seen as a collaborative effort with social media platforms. The Taiwanese government accepts that it cannot keep the online environment safe and secure without the engagement of digital platforms.

These are crucial lessons which our government must seriously consider given it is still equivocal with regards to the status of MIL in the curriculum. There is an effort to integrate MIL in the education structure, but consistency and cohesion remain elusive. On the other hand, preoccupation with “adopting” Australia’s social media ban simply allows politicians to present themselves as defenders of children without necessarily engaging with the more complex causes of youth vulnerability both online and offline.

READ MORE FROM ESQUIRE:

Opinion: Impeachment is Just Political Theater Now

Opinion: What Coalitions Should Be Built For

Opinion: On the Perils of Certifying a Bill as Urgent