Teenagers hold smartphones in this undated photo, as South Korea considers restrictions on children's access to social media amid growing concerns over excessive use and online safety. Courtesy of Getty Images.
A country that once ordered teenagers off online games at midnight faces a déjà vu question over whether state intervention is the best answer.
President Lee Jae Myung — himself an active social media user — instructed the Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC) at a Cabinet meeting this week to develop policy measures.
Commission chief Kim Jong-cheol said an action plan would be prepared in the first half of next year following public hearings. Nine related bills are pending in the National Assembly.
The details — including the age threshold, scope of restrictions and implementation date — need to be talked out. The commission has been considering restrictions on registration by children under 14 alongside measures targeting features that encourage excessive use among older teenagers.
International experts drawing on experiences abroad caution that age limits have their limits.
They argue that effective safeguards must also address what happens after teenagers log in, how platforms keep them there and how families and schools can help them navigate a digital world where friendships, learning and self-expression also take place.
South Korea’s own experience offers a caution.
Introduced in November 2011, the gaming shutdown system barred children under 16 from online computer games between midnight and 6 a.m. It was abolished in January 2022 after years of criticism over its effectiveness and restrictions on young people’s autonomy.
By then, mobile games and other digital entertainment had transformed the market. The government retained a system allowing young people and their guardians to choose gaming hours, while expanding support for families struggling with excessive use.
Kim has cited that experience in arguing for public consensus and policies that distinguish between age groups. A rule aimed at one activity can lose its reach as technology and habits change.
The scale of social media use makes the next intervention consequential.
Government statistics published this year showed that 54.2 percent of elementary school students, 88.6 percent of middle school students and 92.5 percent of high school students used social media in 2025. Those figures measure participation rather than addiction.
For many teenagers, restrictions would affect an established part of daily life.
"Social media should be seen as one dimension amongst many which contributes to the quality of life as a young person, learning, having friends and being educated in contemporary society," Julian Sefton-Green, a professor of new media education at Australia’s Deakin University, told AJP.
Australia became the first country to impose a nationwide under-16 social media account ban in December 2025. Sefton-Green warned that treating social media as the primary cause of young people’s difficulties could leave "a heap of unresolved issues" while overlooking other influences on their health, happiness and education.
One policy choice is to focus more directly on what platforms are designed to do.
Endless feeds, automatic video playback and notifications can prolong use regardless of whether the person holding the phone has passed a legal age threshold. Restrictions on those mechanisms would also reach older teenagers who remain eligible for accounts.
"It is more effective to regulate mechanisms that encourage excessive use than to focus solely on-screen time," French Socialist lawmaker Marietta Karamanli told AJP.
"Endless scrolling, autoplay, late-night notifications, and recommendation algorithms are designed to maximize users’ attention, since the underlying business model is based on advertising," she said.
"A ban on access does not affect these features, which means they can remain just as harmful to a 15- or 16-year-old as to any other user."
Karamanli has pursued parliamentary initiatives seeking European action against addictive platform design. A report on her latest proposed European resolution was submitted on Oct. 29.
The same distinction applies to the content delivered through those systems.
Rachel Rodgers, a professor of applied psychology at Northeastern University, said social media exposure was associated with body-image concerns and disordered eating, particularly among vulnerable young people. But evidence of harm does not establish which intervention will work best.
"There are no data today suggesting that these types of restrictions would be more effective than restrictions applied specifically to appearance-focused and harmful content," Rodgers told AJP, referring to blanket age restrictions.
Governments must also establish whether their chosen measures improve young people’s lives — a task complicated by uneven enforcement and limited access to platform data.
Australia requires major platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. Yet Sefton-Green questioned how consistently age checks were being applied.
"At the moment it’s really impossible to say that the platforms in Australia are using age assurance verification with any degree of comprehensive coverage," he said.
Independent researchers’ limited access to platforms’ internal user data further complicates efforts to assess the results.
Rodgers called for large, representative studies tracking adolescents’ mental health and body-image concerns before and after restrictions take effect.
"Developing effective policy requires assessment of its effects," she said.
Enforcement also brings a trade-off. Establishing that someone is old enough to use a service can require platforms or verification providers to collect additional information about them.
"We don’t want the solution to be more harmful than the problem," Elizabeth K. Englander, a psychology professor and founder of the Massachusetts Aggression Reduction Center at Bridgewater State University, told AJP.
She warned that verification systems using artificial intelligence and facial recognition could introduce privacy risks, while determined teenagers might still find ways around restrictions.
Courts have also drawn different boundaries. France’s Constitutional Council struck down a blanket under-15 social media ban in August. In Florida, a federal appeals court in October allowed enforcement of a law barring under-14 accounts on covered platforms and requiring parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds while litigation continues.
Beyond those legal questions lies the support young people need when they encounter harm.
"The best approach to combating bullying and cyber bullying seems to be a combination of education, awareness, and social support," Englander said.
She emphasized that support from friends and peers can help victims cope with abuse online and offline. Access restrictions alone cannot provide that support or teach young people how to respond.
Nor do the pressures shaping teenagers’ online experiences originate entirely on their phones. Rodgers urged policymakers to address unrealistic appearance ideals across advertising, entertainment, fashion and fitness as well as social media.
Karamanli likewise argued that obligations on platforms need support beyond the screen.
"Digital literacy, parental guidance, and the development of alternatives to screen-based activities are essential complements to public policies and the obligations of platforms," she said.
That approach also gives teenagers a role in shaping the response.
"Schools can do much more to make young people partners in this project and so encourage them to participate in open conversations," Sefton-Green said.
For all his reservations about Australia’s restrictions, he identified one potentially constructive result. The legislation had encouraged families to talk more seriously about their digital lives.
"In a funny way the legislation has actually helped change the quality and nature of conversations in homes," he said.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.
