How to Reshape the Safety Contract for Young People in the Digital Age?

As artificial intelligence, social media, and immersive technologies reshape the world at an unprecedented pace, society faces a serious challenge: how to create a safe and healthy digital environment for young people while encouraging technological development and market innovation? Recently, the Australian government’s proposed legislation to ban children under 14 from using social media and require parental consent for users under 16 has once again brought this global issue to the forefront. This has sparked widespread reflection among the technology community, policymakers, and parents in Europe and America: can we achieve a win-win situation for technology, the market, and the well-being of young people?

The technology industry is known for its philosophy of “moving fast and breaking the mold,” with the market rewarding innovation and user growth. However, the physical and mental development of teenagers follows slower, more sensitive patterns. Social media algorithms, data collection, and unrestricted access to content can seriously conflict with teenagers’ privacy, mental health, and cognitive development.

The Australian proposal exemplifies this conflict. Supporters argue it’s a necessary “barrier” to protect children from cyberbullying, inappropriate content, and addictive design. Critics, however, worry that a simple age ban is too rigid, could infringe on privacy (such as mandatory age verification), hinder teenagers’ access to beneficial digital educational resources, and foster “underground” use that circumvents regulation.

International experts generally believe that the solution lies not in a complete ban or complete laissez-faire, but in building a sophisticated, multi-layered, and collaborative governance framework.

Professor Andrew Przybowski of the Oxford Internet Institute points out, “Evidence suggests that the impact of social media is not universally harmful or beneficial; it is highly dependent on individual usage and platform design.” He emphasizes that technology companies must assume ethical responsibility for “safe design,” embedding the well-being of young people into product development from the outset, rather than resorting to post-hoc remedies. This includes providing robust privacy settings by default, disabling addictive features such as endless scrolling and push notifications, and developing more accurate age verification tools rather than simply and crudely collecting identity information.

Daniel Kitran, a scholar at Stanford University’s Center for Internet Policy, argues that “regulation needs to be as agile as technology. One-size-fits-all bans struggle to keep pace with technological advancements and are easily challenged in the legal arena.” She advocates for a “risk-based regulation” model, requiring platforms to independently audit their algorithms and take clear responsibility for any potential harms to minors, such as body image anxiety and sleep deprivation. The EU’s Digital Services Act has taken a significant step in this direction, setting higher standards for the protection of minors on large platforms.

Jim Steele, CEO of the U.S. nonprofit Common Sense Media, emphasized, “Technology protection cannot replace educational empowerment. Ultimately, we need to cultivate a generation of resilient digital citizens.” He believes that policies should strongly support comprehensive digital literacy education, teaching teenagers how to manage screen time, critically evaluate online information, protect personal data, and encourage healthy online interactions. At the same time, platforms should provide parents with truly effective and easy-to-use monitoring tools, rather than complex and difficult-to-understand settings menus.

Achieving a healthy balance between technology, markets, and youth protection requires a sustained and systematic effort.

Technological Innovation Targets Protection: The market should encourage the development of technologies and services “designed for teenagers” with privacy and security as core competitive advantages, viewing protection as a new growth point.

Clear and Flexible Regulatory Framework: Regulations should set clear safety baselines (such as the principle of data minimization) while leaving room for responsible innovation and encouraging the industry to develop self-regulatory guidelines that exceed legal standards.

Society-wide participation: Families, schools, technology companies, and governments need to engage in continuous dialogue, sharing insights and best practices. Protecting youth is not the responsibility of any single entity, but a collective endeavor requiring multi-faceted solutions.

The debate in Australia is a microcosm of a global dilemma. In the digital age, protecting youth no longer means isolating them from the internet, but requires all stakeholders—from product managers in Silicon Valley to regulators in Brussels, and even the living rooms of every household—to work together to build a smarter, safer, and more human-centered digital ecosystem . This is not only about protecting the next generation, but also about shaping a more sustainable and socially responsible technological future. The true balance lies in allowing the light of technological progress to illuminate the path of every young user’s growth, rather than casting a shadow of risk.

Is Technological Equality Just A Utopian Vision?

Algorithm Feeding and Cognitive Revolution: The Knowledge Maze and Reshaping in the Short Video Era

From Pollution to Resource: A Technical, Systems-Level Response to Electronic Waste

Geopolitical Rupture and the Systemic Crisis of the Global Energy System: Mechanisms, Impacts, and Pathways to Resilience