More countries are outlawing social media for children. Will Singapore join them?

[SINGAPORE] History suggests that once an issue is framed around child protection, it rarely moves backwards.

Seat belt laws, restrictions on tobacco advertising and tighter rules on vaping all followed a similar path. Social media appears to be reaching a similar inflection point.

On Tuesday (Jul 21), France became the first EU country to approve a blanket ban on social-media access for children under the age of 15.

The law is intended to apply to new accounts from September 2026, with existing users given a short transition period.

Whatever questions remain about enforcement, the political signal is hard to miss. Protecting children is increasingly taking precedence over earlier concerns about regulatory restraint.

France is part of a wider shift.

Australia’s world-first restrictions on social-media access for under-16s came into force in December 2025, despite continuing debate over age verification, privacy and circumvention.

The UK has also announced that it will introduce its own under-16 ban, alongside wider measures aimed at limiting excessive use and exposure of children to harmful content.

The details differ, but the direction of travel is clear. The debate is moving away from whether governments should intervene, and towards how far they should go, which features they should regulate, and how platforms should prove that their protections work.

Pragmatic approach to tech governance

Singapore is unlikely to copy these models wholesale. Its approach to technology governance has traditionally been more pragmatic: encourage innovation, impose clear responsibilities on platforms and strengthen intervention when risks emerge.

That gives the country an opportunity to show a third way between blanket prohibition and leaving platforms to regulate themselves.

The foundations of that approach are already visible. The Online Safety Commission began operations in June 2026, providing victims with a dedicated avenue to seek relief from online harms, while strengthening accountability in the digital ecosystem.

At the same time, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has expanded its online safety regime, requiring stronger age-assurance measures, publishing assessments of major platforms, and taking enforcement action when companies failed to adequately protect users from harmful content.

These measures indicate a broader regulatory philosophy. Protecting children online should not depend solely on limiting access. It should also require digital products to be designed differently when young people use them.

This is where the next phase of online safety is likely to be contested.

Policymakers are increasingly asking whether recommendation algorithms, infinite scrolling, autoplay functions, notification systems and AI-driven engagement tools should be designed differently for younger users.

The focus is shifting from content moderation to product architecture, from policing harmful posts to questioning whether platforms should be engineered to maximise engagement among children in the first place.

Age restrictions may still have a role, but they are an incomplete answer on their own.

They can be difficult to enforce, and often require forms of identity or age verification that create privacy concerns of their own. In response, young people may also migrate to less-regulated spaces.

A better approach combines targeted access controls with clearer expectations for age-appropriate design, transparent risk assessment and measurable outcomes.

The third way of curating online safety

For policymakers, this is Singapore’s opportunity to define what that third way looks like.

Rather than relying on sweeping prohibitions, policymakers have sought to raise baseline safety standards in the digital ecosystem.

To reduce children’s exposure to inappropriate content, IMDA has progressively introduced obligations on social-media platforms and app stores, including age-assurance measures.

That model would be consistent with Singapore’s wider approach to digital governance. From artificial intelligence to cybersecurity, the country has sought to create frameworks that leave room for innovation, while building public confidence.

Online child safety offers a chance to apply the same principle to one of the most politically charged questions facing the digital economy.

For Singapore’s business community, the message is equally important: Regulation is only part of a bigger shift. It must be understood as a response to changing societal expectations.

The implications extend well beyond the most immediate scrutiny faced by technology companies.

Consumer brands’ marketing through social-media platforms may face tighter restrictions on advertising or engagement with younger audiences. Meanwhile, media companies are rethinking the way audiences discover content.

Any business designing digital products or communications that may reach children will increasingly be expected to consider their well-being from the start.

That includes financial institutions, healthcare providers and retailers embedding AI-powered digital experiences into customer journeys.

Corporate-affairs leaders should treat online child safety as a question of trust, not simply compliance.

Investors are placing greater emphasis on governance and responsible technology, while parents increasingly expect companies to demonstrate that digital innovation does not come at the expense of vulnerable users.

The businesses that begin early can help shape what responsible innovation should look like.

That means understanding where children encounter their product, testing how features affect different age groups, setting clear internal standards for age-appropriate design, and being prepared to explain the choices they have made.

It also means involving policy, legal, product and corporate-affairs teams before concerns become a crisis.

Companies that wait for legislation will inherit standards designed by others. Those that act earlier have an opportunity to build credibility, contribute practical evidence to policy debate, and show that age safety and commercial innovation can reinforce one another.

The global debate over whether governments should intervene has largely run its course.

The harder task now is building digital environments that are safe by design, commercially sustainable and trusted by the communities they serve.

Singapore has built a reputation for anticipating global regulatory trends, rather than reacting to them.

The country’s contribution should not be another version of the same ban, but a clearer answer to an essential question those bans have exposed – What does responsible digital innovation look like, when child protection becomes a central measure of success?

Both writers are from Penta Group. Shawn Balakrishnan is partner, overseeing Asia-Pacific, and Deborah Giam is managing director for South-east Asia.