Statement by the Internet Freedom Foundation on Karnataka's Social Media Ban for Children Under 16
While child safety online is important, blanket bans raise serious concerns about privacy, enforcement, and the rights of young people
Today, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah announced during the Karnataka Budget 2026–27 speech that the state will ban social media use for children under the age of 16. This makes Karnataka the first Indian state to impose such a restriction. IFF is presently seeking further information and clarity on this announcement, including the proposed legal mechanism, the definition of "social media" being employed, and how enforcement is envisioned. We have checked the website of the Finance Department of the Karnataka Government (https://finance.karnataka.gov.in/192/budget-volumes-2026-27/en) and the documents which includes the official text of the budget speech is not available at present.
A budget speech announcement, by itself, raises more questions than it answers. Will this require state legislation? Will it mandate age-verification systems that create fresh privacy risks for all users, including adults? Will it apply to educational and informational uses of the internet? None of this is clear at present.
While we recognise and share concerns about children's safety and wellbeing online, IFF has consistently cautioned that blanket social media bans are a disproportionate response that can do more harm than good. Such bans often fail to address root causes such as platform design choices that maximise engagement over safety, inadequate data protection frameworks, and poor digital literacy infrastructure while restricting children's right to information, expression, and participation. We have also previously flagged how age-based internet bans carry a serious risk of gendered exclusion.
In the Indian context, where girls and young women already face significant barriers to digital access, a ban framed around "protection" can easily become another tool to deny them connectivity altogether. Families and communities may use such restrictions to justify keeping girls offline permanently, deepening the digital gender divide rather than narrowing it.
IFF will examine the details of this proposal as they emerge and engage with it more fully. Child safety online demands serious, evidence based policy not headline driven prohibitions.