Neil Malik
Would a social media ban actually protect kids?
Would a social media ban actually protect kids?
Photo via Unsplash
The Topline
- Last week, Ottawa introduced Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, which, among other things, forces social media companies to restrict youth under the age of 16 from accessing their platforms.
- AI chatbots won’t be subject to an age restriction, but companies will be required to prevent chatbots from communicating harmful content and to take immediate action in crisis situations involving self-harm or acts of violence toward others.
- A new Digital Safety Commission will “enforce regulations, ensure compliance, make online services safer for children and support victims of online harms.”
- The government also said social media platforms can apply for an exemption “if they have established and maintained sufficient safeguards for children on their platform.”
- Recent polling shows 75 per cent of Canadians say they support a full ban on social media use for anyone under the age of 16, but notably, the poll doesn’t explain to respondents how a ban might be implemented.
Never miss another side to every story
Sign up for The Level's 5-minute newsletter, 3x per week
Thanks for subscribing!
Check your inbox for an email to confirm you're on the list. If there's no email, check your spam filter just in case, then mark us as 'not spam' so that you never miss an issue.
Switch sides,
back and forth
The internet needs a bouncer
If you’re on the fence about a social media ban for youth, think about it this way: even the platforms themselves realized from day one a minimum age was needed.
But many years later, two things are clear. The minimum age of 13 originally set by most platforms is too low. And they hardly enforce it to begin with.
The Safe Social Media Act (Bill C-34) addresses both of those gaps. It mandates a minimum age of 16 for all users. A new Digital Safety Commission will enforce the law by issuing penalties to platforms that don’t comply.
If there’s one guy who understands the importance of setting up children for success later in life, it’s Raffi — the beloved children’s entertainer who performed his songs for millions of children.
The singer of Baby Beluga and Down by the Bay is now behind the Raffi Foundation for Child Honouring, which advocates for teenagers just as much as toddlers.
“Platforms were built to maximize engagement, not protect children. We are seeing rising rates of anxiety, depression, cyberbullying, and sexual exploitation,” the foundation posted .
“We already protect children with seatbelts and age minimums for gambling and tobacco. It's time to protect them online too.”
The Canadian Centre for Child Protection (C3P) backs that claim up. C3P’s tipline, Cybertip.ca, received almost 30,000 reports last year, with 26 per cent coming directly from victimized youth.
In a press release, C3P says , “We’ve also witnessed a 300 per cent increase in reports concerning sextortion in the past five years as well as rising reports of online sadistic violence and AI-fuelled victimization, representing the public safety emergency unravelling before our very eyes.”
Those numbers don’t even scratch the surface if you include the constant threat of cyberbullying that takes place 24/7.
An outright ban might also be good for the physical, as well as mental health, of our kids.
Doug Roth, CEO of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, says "Online environments are shaping the health and well-being of Canadian youth” and we can protect our kids by “helping encourage more time away from screens and increased physical activity.”
The best part about Bill C-34 is parents no longer have to be the bad guy. Once it becomes law, they can blame the government for restricting internet usage.
There are some privacy concerns, especially if all Canadians now have to prove their age by uploading an image of their photo ID to a third-party age-verification service.
I get it. Nobody wants to give up even more personal information. But aren’t we already past the point of no return?
Our phones have had access to our fingerprints since 2013. Technology can locate where we are at all times. We can pay for groceries instantly because of facial recognition.
“Privacy” doesn’t really exist anymore, and if technology can be used to raise a generation of kids that are kept safe from online harms, that’s a trade worth making.
Kids will beat this by lunch
If Canada wants to see how effective a ban on social media is, take a look down under.
Australia’s under-16 ban took effect in December 2025, but early results suggest it’s not exactly airtight. The first compliance report found roughly 70 per cent of children still had access three months later, with no clear drop in harm complaints.
Is that really surprising? Other than driving a car underage, which is heavily enforced, when has a law restricting teenagers from doing something ever worked?
It’s like vaping. Teenagers who want TikTok will get it no matter what restrictions or laws are put in place. Plenty of high-schoolers already know how to stream UFC fights without paying. Like in Australia, they’ll find a way around it here too.
On his website , University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist really gets into the weeds of Bill C-34 and highlights several other flaws.
For starters, he says the law might not be constitutional if it gets challenged in court for restricting freedom of expression.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation is even more blunt about it. “The Charter guarantees ‘everyone’ the right to freedom of expression. There is no question this includes people under the age of 16.”
Next, mandatory age verification or age estimation represents “an enormous privacy risk,” says Geist.
Let’s assume all users need to submit their ID to a third-party age-verification provider. “These providers are typically outside of Canada which makes it difficult to apply Canadian privacy law to the data collection,” he adds.
It’s bad enough to have your password compromised, but imagine having a scan of your government ID floating around the dark web as a result of a data breach.
Alternatively, AI age estimation tools essentially use a device’s camera to try and figure out how old you are. This kind of technology isn’t simply off-putting, it can be inaccurate.
A 2025 Australian study confirmed it. “While many systems showed broadly fair results, some exhibited reduced accuracy for non-Caucasian users, older adults or female-presenting users near age thresholds.”
It goes on to say, “Test scenarios involving occluded faces, substandard lighting, unusual angles or low-quality cameras showed increased false rejections or misclassifications.”
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association sums it all up by saying “a ban will only make it more difficult for youth who inevitably bypass the measures to address the online harms they will continue to face. Those that choose to comply with the ban will be excluded from important sources of information and community.”
That last part is so important.
As Geist says, “Social media is also a documented lifeline for marginalized youth, including LGBTQ+ youth in non-affirming environments, so a ban hits hardest the kids with the fewest alternatives.”
Meanwhile, Bill C-34 lets the platforms off the hook by failing to address what makes social media harmful in the first place.
Addictive design, poor content moderation and privacy concerns are problems for users of all ages. Yet, it’s those under 16 who are vilified.
“A ban on kids using social media leaves the platforms largely untouched and merely changes who is allowed to use it,” says Geist.
