Tiered social media access preferred over outright ban, but is it enough to keep teens safe?

Singapore

Come 2027, Singapore will introduce legislation on age assurance and safer design of social media for teenagers. But experts say keeping children safe online requires more than restrictions.

New: You can now listen to articles.

This audio is generated by an AI tool.

03 Nov 2026 06:00AM

SINGAPORE: When her two elder children started using social media a few years ago, Ms Michelle Hon saw it as an opportunity for them to pick up skills such as video recording and editing.

Now aged 14 and 12, her children – along with her youngest, aged 10 – use platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok to post content and chat with friends. Ms Hon, 47, has one main rule: They cannot add or chat with strangers online.

"Beyond that, I think I'm fairly flexible. And of course, sometimes I do spot checks, but unannounced," said the business owner.

Her approach reflects a wider preference among parents for letting children navigate social media with safeguards rather than shutting them out. 

About 80 per cent of parents and nearly 70 per cent of youths support tiered access over an outright ban, said the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) following an engagement with more than 2,000 parents and youths.

The ministry said the findings reinforce the government's proposed approach of age-appropriate access, alongside platform changes that give young people stronger protections.

It intends to introduce legislation next year on age assurance and safer design of social media for teenagers.

But even as Singapore moves towards more safeguards on social media for children, experts say restrictions alone will not keep children safe online and that parents have a crucial role to play.   

TIERED ACCESS OR OUTRIGHT BAN?

With tiered or age-appropriate access to social media, younger users will face more restrictions through age assurance measures and platform design, to be gradually eased as they grow older.

These include restrictions on inappropriate content, unwanted contact and features such as autoplay and daily time limits.

Many youths describe their first experiences on social media as overwhelming, which is the risk of a cliff-edge approach to unrestricted access, said Ms Zoe Toh, the head of advocacy at YouthTech Institute, a youth-led charitable tech movement. 

A tiered approach "retains autonomy for youths", she said, which is crucial for allowing them to gradually build judgment that will later enable them to better navigate these spaces on their own. 

An example of age-appropriate implementation is a version of social media that might only allow younger youths to access content by their friends and exclude algorithm-based feeds, said Ms Toh. 

In YouthTech’s report, youths overwhelmingly cited the importance of keeping their ability to decide how their experience online should be and rejected an outright ban, she added.

While more countries have enforced social media bans for children – Australia, Indonesia and Malaysia are recent examples – experts agree that a ban can do more harm than good. 

"A ban is like locking the kitchen – it stops (access to) the junk food, but it doesn't teach anyone how to eat right," said Ms June Fong, a psychologist at Promises Healthcare.

She noted that bans tend to backfire, with strict restrictions leading to isolation, rebellion and children who don't know how to use the internet safely when they eventually get access.

Ms Fong added that bans breed secrecy and assume that social media is only harmful, when it can be a lifeline to community for many young people, especially those who feel isolated.

Tiered access, on the other hand, can match children's growth and development, letting them earn and exercise autonomy over time instead of abruptly.

"The question isn't 'Should they have access?' – it's 'Have we taught them how to use it?'" said Ms Fong.

"A ban is easier to legislate. But 'gradual with guardrails' is what actually protects them."

AGE ASSURANCE MEASURES

Still, a tiered approach can come with challenges in implementation. The key is in ensuring that age assurance measures are in place and work effectively, experts said.

Age assurance typically includes age verification, which relies on a verified source of identity documentation, and age estimation, which uses artificial intelligence and facial age analysis to determine a user’s likely age.

MDDI has previously said that age verification is seen as more reliable and easier to enforce.

Even so, Ms Toh said these measures can be circumvented. About 72 per cent of youths engaged by YouthTech said they would or had already bypassed age checks, and that faking one's age to access social media is "very normalised". 

Currently, users must declare that they are at least 13 years old when creating accounts on most major social media platforms in Singapore. 

Additionally, there is the challenge of how age-assurance measures should be implemented to ensure that users are accurately verified, said Ms Toh.

In Australia, for example, youths have used makeup to circumvent the facial scans used to estimate a user's age, she said.

Secondary 3 student Evan Kuek, who spends most of his free time on YouTube and about an hour a day on Instagram, said that some youths who are "very attached" to their social media use would probably not respect restrictions. 

"They might jail-break their phones or something like that," he added, referring to the process of removing software restrictions and security controls imposed by mobile phone manufacturers.

Youths have also told YouthTech that they prefer government-backed identification methods for age verification.

"This suggests an opportunity to leverage existing trusted infrastructure while addressing youths' concerns over data privacy, provided appropriate safeguards are in place," said Ms Toh.

Experts said the safeguards must also account for differences in children's stages of development.

In MDDI's engagement with parents and youths, both groups felt children aged zero to six should have no access, while those aged seven to 15 should have age-appropriate access.

Youths generally supported greater access to social media from age 16, seeing young people as more mature and better able to manage their use independently, while parents continued to support age-appropriate access at that age.

Ms Wendy Tan, deputy director of TOUCH Cyber Wellness, said there would ideally be finer distinctions within the 13 to 17 age band, given the developmental differences between a 13-year-old and a 17-year-old.

"However, we recognise that national regulation must also consider the reliability of age assurance, implementation complexity, consistency and enforceability," she said.

"A simpler framework is therefore a reasonable starting point."

Age assurance, she added, must ultimately lead to "meaningful" safeguards.

Once a platform identifies a minor, stronger privacy settings, restrictions on unwanted contact and safer content recommendations should apply by default, she said.

The aim is to protect children while progressively helping them develop judgment and self-regulation for greater independence online.

"It is therefore crucial to prepare and empower parents to learn about these available safeguards, enabling them to practise and reinforce good habits at home, alongside their children," she said.

SAFETY STARTS AT HOME

In supporting tiered access to social media, parents and youths told CNA that it's equally important to ensure that children are first taught how to safely use social media.

Ms Hon, the mother-of-three, believes it is good for children to have some exposure to social media, instead of experiencing it as a "brand new world" when they come of age.

"We can't bubble wrap them, so whatever restrictions that either the government or the platforms put in place, as a parent, I'll just try to teach them how to make good decisions," she said.

Other parents are more cautious about giving children access, but also recognise the difficulties of keeping them off social media entirely.

Ms Chen Xiu Ying, 46, was hesitant to give her 12- and 14-year-old children smartphones – but felt compelled to do so because there was a reliance on WhatsApp at school, she said.

Her main concerns about social media are exposure to inappropriate content and scams. But with built-in parental controls on the iPhone, Ms Chen can schedule downtime and set screen time rules for her children.

While Ms Chen used to be in support of a social media ban for children, Australia's attempt at implementing the ban has made her think twice.

"When you’ve already opened Pandora's box, it's a little bit hard to stuff it all back in," she said.

"If you tell (children) cannot means cannot, that becomes tempting. But the moment you let them taste it, there's an appetite to want more. So we need to educate them based on values, and that starts from a very young age."

A tiered approach is a "good first step" to Ms Chen, but she does not expect the government to be the "vanguard" of social media use.

"They can set the measures in place, but whether parents take it seriously is another thing," she said.  

Evan, the Sec 3 student, is one youth in favour of tiered access to social media, acknowledging that young children are "very impressionable since their brains are still growing".

Nevertheless, everybody "should be mindful about the content they consume", he said. 

"Even if they think the media they're consuming is okay ... they should take stock every now and then."

Polytechnic student Aditya Mishra, 18, acknowledged downsides of social media such as distraction, doomscrolling and an unhealthy dependence on instant gratification. 

Mr Mishra, who started using Instagram when he was 12, also favours giving children opportunities to connect online safely. In his view, age-appropriate measures could be lifted when children are above 16.

"Most students are mature enough by then in order to make decisions for themselves wisely, and also prioritise their academics and personal goals." 

A youth who gave his name as Ben said he feels a child's maturity matters more than their age.

The 18-year-old started using YouTube when he was around five, where he spent up to three hours a day, he said. Today, he mainly uses social media to connect with friends, but recognises the perils of addictive algorithms and negative content.

"The best way to have children be responsible on social media is not laws or bans, but between the parent and the child," he said.

Dr Annabelle Chow, a clinical psychologist at Annabelle Psychology, said the most effective safeguards are holistic.

"We cannot place the responsibility entirely on children, parents, schools or platforms. As the saying goes, it takes a kampung (village) to raise a child," she said.

Dr Chow said parents should consider the healthy use of social media as a skill in and of itself, much like learning how to cross the road or interact and play with friends.

Children learn it through practice and guidance, rather than simply upon reaching a certain age, she added.

It helps to first understand what social media provides for the child, said Dr Chow, whether it provides entertainment, a way to keep up with friends or simply to unwind.

Sports, hobbies and time with friends offer other ways to meet those needs. This does not mean filling every spare hour on a child's calendar, she said, adding that some unstructured time also gives them room to discover their own interests and be creative.

"Ultimately, it is less about taking the phone away and more about giving children enough in their everyday lives that the phone does not need to fill every gap," she said.

Source: CNA/er(ml)