Child Rights Network (CRN) called on legislators to reconsider the proposed social media ban on minors.

In a statement, Au Quilala, CRN convener and executive director of the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD), said: “While we recognize the intention of the bills filed seeking to ban children’s access to social media, we believe that a blanket social media ban is not the solution. CRN believes that what should be prioritized is making the online environment safer and the social media platforms less addictive by design.”

CRN is the group that advocated for the Anti-OSAEC (Online Sexual Abuse or Exploitation of Children) and the Anti-CSAEM (Child Sexual Abuse or Explotation Materials) Act. They have added that children do need to be protected online, but a blanket ban of social media would create more problems than solve them.

CRN has suggested that the government could look into regulations for child safety, such as their visibility in public search results, late-night notifications, and algorithms that drive engagement.

“By strengthening safeguards and focusing on these features, the law can stay effective even as new internet intermediaries emerge,” Quilala said.

This essentially means the law can remain effective even when new internet trends and issues appear.

CRN has also recommended that children in Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and BARMM must be consulted. While that presents its own set of challengings, CRN has looked into Australia, who has implemented a social media ban of children and teens under 16. The results have been mixed, mostly considered a “flop” and children continue to gain access to their social media accounts.

Amnesty Tech claimed that a ban would only continue to expose children to online risks. There are, after all, other social platforms with less protections, and, may pose more dangers to children as they explore alternatives.

“What this shows is that the law is not fully working in practice. If the Philippines follows the same approach as Australia, it could end up with a law that looks strict on paper, but is widely ignored in reality,” Quilala said.

CRN recommends regulations that would educate children, young people, and parents on internet safety. CRN mentioned existing government community programs, which includes Family Development Sessions, Parent Effectiveness Services, and Parents-Teachers Associations in schools.

CRN mentioned that this would require the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) to coordinate agencies, including the Department of Social Welfare and Development, to include more families.

“This could help equip parents and caregivers with the tools they need to guide their children, and ensure that online safety starts at home,” Quilala said.

The Philippine government has already had discussions with other platforms, such as Roblox, who have promised to implement stronger guardrails. Meta, on the other hand, has recently shown hesitation when the government of New Mexico in the US, insisted on strengthening child safety features, calling it “unfeasible,” and should regulations be implemented, Meta would withdraw from the state.

Meta is the owner of multiple social media platforms, which includes: Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Threads.

It should be noted that the Philippines remains to be among the top global users of Meta apps. Facebook alone has about 100 million Filipino users. So, maybe, the Philippines has some leverage in the matter, compared to the 2.2 million population of New Mexico.

The Philippines is not alone in considering following the footsteps of Australia’s under-16 social media ban. Other countries such as Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Indonesia, Malaysia, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, and UK, are also considering banning social media platforms. There is no deadline, as of now, when the Philippine government will implement the ban or open discussions with social media platforms in strengthening child safety as they did with Roblox.