With the introduction of a social media ban for children and adolescents in December 2025, Australia has sparked a debate that is now also engaging policymakers and the public here in Germany. A study by the bidt found that 66 percent of people aged 16 and older in Germany support a ban on social media for children and adolescents under the age of 14. These approval ratings underscore the urgency of establishing effective safe spaces online. But what form of regulation can adequately address this challenge?
The risks associated with frequent use of social media, particularly for children and young people, are widely recognised as a problem. The platforms’ designs, which encourage addictive behaviour, and the resulting impact on the mental health of young users pose challenges for policymakers and society. The introduction of a social media ban in Australia ultimately brought the issue to the attention of the wider public in Germany and across Europe. Since then, various regulatory measures – ranging as far as a ban on social media for under-age users – have been the subject of high-profile public debate. However, there remains persistent disagreement regarding the practical and effective implementation of such measures, their efficacy, and questions about whether they might hinder media participation or potentially strengthen media literacy. Clear political answers are as yet lacking.
To the Bidt-study
Current regulation: between national symbolic politics and European law
Dr Roland A. Stürz, Head of the Data and Monitoring Department at the bidt, describes current regulatory mechanisms in an opinion piece in the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” as predominantly wait-and-see, non-binding and retrospective rather than preventive. In doing so, he criticises current regulatory practice and national tokenism. Instead of harmonised policy initiatives at European level, there is increasing discussion of national countries acting unilaterally. The European Digital Services Act (DSA), whose original aim was to harmonise regulatory measures and provide a legal framework for regulation, is failing in its implementation.
Stürz sees the drawback of the DSA’s impact as lying in the fact that the architecture of current regulatory practice does not take a preventative approach, and, in view of unilateral national initiatives that are undermining regulatory efforts at EU level, he calls for a paradigm shift.
It is not up to regulatory authorities to spend years proving the risk; rather, platform operators must demonstrate that they have implemented effective, age-appropriate safeguards before their services are approved.
Dr. Roland A. Stürz To the profile
The appropriate approaches set out in the guidelines issued under the DSA must be transformed from non-binding guidance into enforceable access requirements capable of preventively averting potential risks.
Appropriate protection of minors does not require blanket restricted zones online
Stürz proposes basing this on an already established and tried-and-tested model: the Film Industry’s Voluntary Self-Regulation (FSK). According to Stürz, regular review procedures for social media, similar to those of the FSK, could help to establish clear protective boundaries for children and young people by approving or blocking platforms for specific age groups following a review. This would not entail a blanket ban, but rather a tiered form of regulation, as well as appropriate and safe digital spaces that do not compromise minors’ ability to engage and participate. Furthermore, this flexible model – which can be adjusted at short notice – would place a greater obligation on platform operators to guarantee greater safety when using their platforms and to implement appropriate protective mechanisms. Teachers and parents, too, could benefit from such regulation and see a lasting reduction in their workload.
Stürz therefore argues that there is no need for blanket digital exclusion zones to provide greater protection for young people within the dynamics of digitalisation. Numerous expert commissions are also in agreement on this point. Rather, what is needed are simply functioning, age-appropriate safe spaces.
If we are serious about protecting minors in the digital age, we must tackle the problem at its root: moving away from ex post sanctions and toward effective, preventive ex ante regulation.
Dr. Roland A. Stürz To the profile
To the opinion piece in the SZ (in german, paid content)
The blog posts published by the bidt reflect the views of the authors; they do not reflect the position of the institute as a whole.
