I think, therefore IB

The global conversation around children, teenagers and social media is reaching fever pitch. From Australia’s ban for under-16s to the shifting legislative landscape in Europe, the message from governments is clear: ‘We must protect the children.’ While the motive, safeguarding young people’s mental health, is undeniably noble, as educators committed to the IB’s focus on critical thinking and global contexts, we must ask: Is a blanket ban the right tool, or are we being sold a ‘solution’ that creates a massive new infrastructure of surveillance?

In Europe, the push for control is already codified. The EU Digital Services Act (DSA) and the UK Online Safety Act have moved beyond mere suggestions. These laws mandate that platforms like TikTok and Instagram must have ‘highly effective’ age verification in place.

However, the ‘Trojan Horse’ lies in the eIDAS 2.0 regulation, which seeks to create a European Digital Identity Wallet. While presented as a convenience for banking or travel, there is significant pressure to link this wallet to ‘High-Risk’ online services which would inevitably include social media. In France, the government has already experimented with ‘Voucher’ systems where a third party verifies your ID and gives you a digital token to enter a site.

Governments aren’t tech-illiterate; they’re fully aware of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). Any teenager with basic tech skills knows that a VPN can spoof their location to a country without a ban in seconds. If a 14-year-old in London or Sydney can ‘move’ their IP address to Switzerland to access TikTok, the ban has failed.

Since governments know these bans are easily bypassed, we have to ask: Why proceed? The answer lies in the enforcement mechanism itself. To ‘fix’ the VPN problem, governments would eventually need to mandate that all internet access points or app stores require a verified Digital ID. By starting with a ‘child safety’ ban that is intentionally easy to bypass, they create the justification for more intrusive, universal identity checks later.

Think about how a social media ban would actually work. A simple ‘I am over 18’ tick-box is ineffective. To enforce a real ban, platforms are being pushed toward three main technologies:

1. Database Matching: Linking your account to government records (Passports/National ID).
2. Credit Card Verification: Using financial footprints to prove adulthood.
3. Biometric Age Estimation: Using AI to scan your face and guess your age.

As IB teachers, we know that the forbidden fruit effect is real. A ban doesn’t stop a 14-year-old from using a VPN; it simply stops them from talking to us about what they see. The real solution lies in our classrooms: equipping students with the ATL (Approaches to Learning) skills of self-management and media literacy.

We should be teaching them how algorithms manipulate dopamine, not how to bypass government firewalls. Let’s not let the Trojan Horse of a ban close the door on the vital education our students actually need to survive the 21st century.

Critical thinking discussion prompts

1. The ‘Safety vs. Agency’ Paradox: In our pursuit of ‘protecting’ students, are we inadvertently stripping them of the agency needed to develop self-management skills? If a student never learns to navigate a digital ‘danger zone’ in a controlled environment, are they more at risk when they eventually turn 18?
2. The Ethics of Biometric Proof: Does requiring a biometric scan (facial estimation) or a government ID to access social media set a dangerous precedent for the Right to Anonymity? In TOK terms, how does the ‘authentication of the knower’ change the way we interact with knowledge shared online?
3. The VPN Reality Check: If a policy is known to be easily bypassed by the very demographic it targets (via VPNs or ‘ghost’ accounts), is the policy truly about Child Safety, or is it a performance designed to build the infrastructure for Digital Identity?
4. Information Literacy as the ‘True’ Antidote: Should ‘Digital Literacy’ be treated as a standalone subject rather than a sub-point in a homeroom syllabus? How can we shift the focus from preventing access to deconstructing the algorithm?
5. The Global Context of Surveillance: How do these Western social media bans compare to the Great Firewall (of China) or social credit systems used elsewhere? Is the mechanism of a Digital ID Wallet functionally different, or just rebranded for a democratic context?

---