Governments, safeguarding groups and parents across the world are starting to ask a serious question: should children under 16 be allowed on social media at all?
Countries such as Australia are already debating stronger restrictions following their nationwide ban on under 16s having social media accounts. In the UK, regulators such as Ofcom are gaining new powers through the Online Safety Act 2023 to force platforms to take greater responsibility for protecting young users.
The debate usually focuses on what should be removed. Less attention is given to the obvious follow-up question: if teenagers are not on social media, what will they do instead?
When many parents grew up, the internet was slow, expensive or simply not available. Teenagers filled their time differently. They played outside, joined sports teams, worked part-time jobs, or simply hung around with friends in the real world. The infrastructure for these real world environments barely exists now; social clubs have closed, transport is poor and expensive and the I dread to think about the risk analysis required to allow a child to use a pencil in an after school club…
If policymakers remove social media without rebuilding alternatives, teenagers will not suddenly start reading books and learning the violin. They will simply move somewhere else online and many of those places are far less suitable. To make restrictions work, society needs to replace what social media currently provides.
1. Connection
The biggest role social media plays for teenagers is simple communication. It is where friendships happen. If platforms disappear overnight, young people will still want to message friends, organise meetups and talk about everyday life.
One realistic alternative is private communication platforms designed specifically for younger users. These would allow messaging between known contacts only, with strict age verification and no public feeds. The key difference is that communication stays within existing social circles rather than broadcasting to strangers.
2. Smaller digital communities
Large social networks thrive on scale. Millions of users, endless scrolling and algorithms deciding what people see. Teenagers do not actually need that scale.
A healthier model would be smaller, moderated digital communities built around schools, clubs or shared interests. Think group forums, project collaboration spaces and moderated chat rooms. These environments keep the social element but remove follower counts, viral metrics and anonymous trolling.
3. Interest before identity
Most social platforms are built around identity. Profiles, selfies, likes and popularity metrics dominate the experience. Beancounters have to keep the tills ringing so that the Board keeps seeing upwards trends; this skews their mindset when they walk into an office. Ever tried to get an Instaslut account removed – if they have more than about 20k followers, good luck. The platforms prefer to restrict teenagers from viewing skin, but they need to numbers to keep drawing in the advertisers.
4. Alternative platforms built around activities
Coding communities, digital art groups, music production forums, game development spaces and writing clubs all exist online already. They simply are not where the majority of teenagers spend their time. If social media access were restricted, interest-based platforms could fill that gap. Instead of performing for an audience, young people would focus on creating things together.
5. Rebuilding real-world spaces
When older generations say “we just went outside”, they forget something important: there used to be far more places for them to go when they were young. Youth clubs, sports leagues, music rehearsal spaces and community centres were common. Over the past two decades many have disappeared due to funding cuts, rising business costs and changing local priorities. If society wants teenagers off social media, those environments will need rebuilding; that is unlikely to happen in the short term.
Accessible sports programmes, creative workshops, volunteering opportunities and youth groups all provide the same social benefits without the constant digital exposure.
6. Entertainment without the algorithm
Ever mentioned someone on a chat platform and logged into a social media platform and found exactly what you were talking about? Linger over a cute puppy video and your feed will be innundated with more cute dogs. Short-form video feeds are designed to be addictive. Endless scrolling fills every spare moment.
Entertainment for Teenagers
Gaming communities, creative software, streaming services and collaborative projects can all provide the same downtime without the social pressure of public platforms. Many young people become deeply engaged when introduced to video editing, animation, coding or music production. The difference is that these tools reward creating rather than performing.
Banning social media sounds simple. In practice it only works if alternatives exist. Teenagers use these platforms because they meet three basic needs: connection, entertainment and identity. Remove the platforms without replacing those functions and young people will simply bypass the rules using fake ages, secondary accounts or VPNs.
If governments want restrictions to succeed, they must build something better alongside them; that means safer digital communities, creative platforms that reward participation, and real-world spaces where young people can spend time together.
Social media created a new playground; if you lock the gates for under 16s, the real challenge is deciding what should fill it next. What are your suggestions ?
References
Online Safety Act 2023 UK legislation establishing new online safety duties for digital platforms.
Ofcom UK communications regulator responsible for enforcing the Online Safety Act.
