Karnataka plans social media ban for users under 16

During the state’s budget speech on Friday, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah announced plans to prohibit social media use for children under 16 to prevent the adverse effects of mobile phones. Siddaramaiah did not share details on how the restrictions would be enforced, and two sources at separate tech companies reported that the state government did not hold a consultation before the announcement. The proposal aligns with a broader global movement; last December, Australia became the first country to ban social media for teenagers, and on Friday, Indonesia announced it would restrict access to high-risk platforms for users under 16. Malaysia is examining similar measures, while officials in the Indian states of Goa and Andhra Pradesh are studying similar restrictions. In January, India’s chief economic adviser V. Anantha Nageswaran also proposed age-based limits on platforms he described as predatory.

Tech companies and legal experts are pushing back against the proposed ban. A spokesperson for Meta stated that the company supports measures giving parents greater control over teenagers’ app usage but cautions against broad bans. The spokesperson warned that such restrictions could push teenagers toward less safe, unregulated sites or logged-out experiences. Meta also argued that because teenagers use around 40 apps a week on average, restrictions targeting only a few platforms would not necessarily improve safety.

Legal experts have also questioned the state’s authority. Aparajita Bharti, a founding partner at the tech and public policy consulting firm The Quantum Hub, stated that it is unclear whether the Karnataka state government has the legislative authority to enforce such restrictions. Kazim Rizvi, the founding director of New Delhi-based think tank The Dialogue, noted that broad internet regulations fall largely under India’s federal jurisdiction. “A state can certainly articulate the policy objective of child safety, but a binding, platform-facing ban would be much harder for a state to sustain on its own without running into Centre-State and constitutional questions,” Rizvi said, referring to the division of powers between India’s federal government and individual states.

Digital rights advocacy group the Internet Freedom Foundation also criticized the proposal, stating that blanket restrictions raise enforcement questions and could require age-verification systems that create new privacy risks. The group warned that broad bans risk restricting children’s access to information and expression, and could deepen India’s digital gender divide—the gap in access to digital technology between genders—if families use the measures to keep girls offline.

Why it matters

The proposal highlights the growing tension between state-level policy ambitions and federal jurisdiction in India, where internet regulation typically falls under central authority. It also reflects a broader global struggle among governments attempting to regulate youth online safety without overreaching.