I want to reiterate to readers why I advocate for safe, responsible and accountable platforms, social media and digital engagements. As mentioned previously many times, the technologies are advancing at a rapid pace that societies, governments and regulatory authorities cannot respond at the same pace.  Corporations, large tech companies and profit-maximising organisations have no concern over the disproportionate harm and damage they do to children, any person or society at large.

 I know very little about technology, like a drop of water compared to the sea. However, I want to ensure new knowledge (what we learn from pure research), technology (how we use that new knowledge to solve a problem) and engineering (how we work on finding a sustainable, efficient and effective solution to a problem) are used to build better lives and a better world.  I am an advocate for sustainability and responsible tech. If you have missed some of the SriLankaNZ articles, you can read them to get a better understanding. 

As discussed in a previous article, US courts ruled that the harm that happened to some of the people was due to the way it was designed. 

As reported in a CNN online report, A California jury has found Meta and YouTube liable on all counts in a landmark case that accused the tech giants of intentionally addicting a young woman and injuring her mental health. The report further said “Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design of their platforms, knew their design was dangerous, failed to warn of those risks and caused substantial harm to the plaintiff, the jury found.

The decision could set a precedent for hundreds of similar cases and lead to major changes in how social media platforms operate, especially for young users — as well as millions, even billions, in losses for the tech companies.

The case also marks a watershed moment for social media, following years of concerns from parents, advocates and lawmakers about online harms to children ranging from mental health concerns to sexual exploitation.”

Reference: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/25/tech/social-media-addiction-trial-jury-decision

I carried out some research in the public domain to collect data (data mining) related to the banning of social media for under-16s. This prompted me to do something when I heard in the media that in New Zealand, we are asking young children whether they want access to social media or not. It is good to get their views. However, we should be cautious of weighing that input against what evidence-based research and educational sociologists propose. I learnt recently that experts treat this issue as a tobacco moment. Only the senior generation may remember how tobacco was promoted decades ago, especially in movies/films, society and how its consequences are still hurting families and societies.

I found a live tracker for social media bans for children(Live Tracker). You can access that using the link https://wired-parents.com/social-media-age-restrictions-children-by-country/

According to this website, Social Media Bans for Children by Country  Live Tracker 2026, there are more than 40 countries that now have social media bans for children either in place, in progress, or under active consideration. Australia led the way in December 2025 with a nationwide ban for under-16s. Since then, France, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Greece, and the UK have all advanced legislation of their own, and US states from Florida to Massachusetts are passing state-level restrictions.

The page of Live Tracker tracks every country and US state that has passed, proposed, or is actively considering restrictions on children’s social media use. According to the website, the tracker is updated weekly.

Continued to Issue 38….

Dr Amal Punchihewa – Palmerston North