As experts in the fields of psychology, pedagogy, prevention of risky behavior, intervention, media studies, and the education and safety of children in online environments, we consider it important to respond to public discussions regarding the potential introduction of a blanket ban on social networks for children under 15 or 16 years old.

We share the concerns of parents, schools, and the public about the impacts of the digital environment on children and adolescents. Social networks can be associated with a number of risks, including cyberbullying, exposure to harmful content, pressure on appearance, sexual harassment, blackmail, or excessive use. These risks exist and require a systemic response. However, we believe that a blanket ban on social networks for children under 15 or 16 years old is neither an appropriate nor an effective solution.

At first glance, a ban on social networks for children may create the impression that children will be better protected from the risks of the online environment. In reality, however, it may lead to a false sense of security. The enforceability of such a ban is problematic, as children can relatively easily circumvent technical restrictions – for example, by providing false ages, using accounts of parents, siblings, or peers, or employing technical solutions to bypass the ban (e.g., VPNs). Technical solutions intended to prevent such circumvention, such as automated age recognition from facial features using AI, face significant unreliability and the risk of erroneous decisions. Other solutions, such as age verification through ID cards or other identity documents, raise serious questions about privacy protection, data security, and the appropriateness of such interference with the rights of both children and adult users.

A fundamental problem is that a formal ban may not mean a real restriction on children's access to the online environment. If adults assume that children are not on social networks because access has been banned, they may easily overlook the risks that children continue to face. In some cases, these risks may even increase, as children may use online services covertly, without open communication with adults and without the possibility of timely support.

A blanket ban may also lead to a shift of children to less safe online platforms. If children leave large and at least partially regulated services, it does not mean they will be less online. They may start using smaller, more anonymous, and poorly moderated platforms, where it will be more difficult to ensure protection against risky content, predatory behavior, or online aggression.

Current scientific knowledge also does not provide sufficient evidence that a blanket ban on social networks would improve children's mental health. Research shows that the impacts of social network use are very individual and depend on a number of factors, such as the child's maturity, personality, family background, the way digital technologies are used, or the quality of relationships in the offline environment. Some children may be more vulnerable to negative influences and need targeted support and protection, while others may use the online environment without serious difficulties and benefit from it, such as social support, space for self-expression, development of interests, or contact with beneficial communities.

Instead of a ban, we consider the following steps to be key:

1. Increase the responsibility of digital platforms. Platforms used by children and adolescents must bear greater responsibility for the safety of their environment. This includes safer default settings, stricter privacy protection, limitations on data collection, more transparent recommendation systems, and effective suppression of content that is demonstrably harmful to children. Algorithms designed for children must not prioritize toxic, extreme, sexualized, or self-harming content.

2. Strengthen media and digital education. Children need to understand how social networks work. Media and digital education should be a systematic part of education, not just a marginal or one-off topic. In this regard, we call for a revision of the Framework Educational Programs, from which the cross-cutting theme of Media Education has been removed.

3. Support parents, not just burden them with responsibility. Parents need practical and understandable information on how to talk to children about the online environment, how to set appropriate boundaries, how to recognize warning signs, and how to proceed in cases of cyberbullying, blackmail, sexual harassment, or other threats. This information should be provided to parents repeatedly and systematically, not just through sporadic campaigns. Part of such an approach may also include incorporating the topic of digital health into preventive check-ups with pediatricians.

4. More rigorously enforce existing age rules. There are already rules limiting children's access to certain online services, including an age limit of 13 years and the requirement for parental consent until the age of 15 (see Act No. 110/2019 Coll., on the processing of personal data). The problem is their low enforceability. Instead of symbolically tightening bans, it is necessary to ensure that platforms actually comply with rules for underage users, and that age verification is conducted safely, appropriately, and without unnecessary collection of sensitive data.

5. Strengthen general primary prevention of risky behavior in this area. Effective prevention should be based on continuity and long-term action, age appropriateness, interactive methods, and above all, on a positive framework that not only reinforces a prohibitive or punitive approach but also develops positive behavior patterns, children's resilience, emotional management skills, knowledge, abilities, and attitudes. Such prevention, however, requires stable and predictable funding. This should combine European and national resources and possibly also mandatory contributions from digital platform operators.

Protecting children in the online environment requires a thoughtful and long-term policy based on scientific evidence. A blanket ban may seem like a simple and decisive solution, but it does not address the root causes of the problem: the risky design of platforms, algorithmic amplification of harmful content, insufficient support from schools and parents, and limited enforceability of existing rules.

The goal should not be to push children out of the digital environment, but to ensure that the digital environment in which they grow up is safer, age-appropriate, and subject to clear rules.

The statement was created by:

Prof. PhDr. David Šmahel, Ph.D., Mgr. Michaela Šaradín Lebedíková, Ph.D., 
prof. Mgr. et Mgr. Hana Macháčková, Ph.D., doc. Mgr. Lenka Dědková, Ph.D.
for the Interdisciplinary Research of the Internet and Society, Masaryk University

Prof. Mgr. Kamil Kopecký, Ph.D., Mgr. Dominik Voráč, Ph.D.
for the Institute for Research and Education in Digital Technologies and Cybersecurity, E-Bezpečí, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc

Signatories of the statement:

doc. PhDr. Lenka Vochocová, Ph.D., Mgr. Tereza Javornicky Brumovská, M.A., Ph.D.,
Mgr. Ing. Jana Rosenfeldová, Ph.D., Mgr. Markéta Supa, M.A., Ph.D.
Institute of Communication Studies and Journalism, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University 

doc. Mgr. Kateřina Lukavská, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Charles University & Addiction Clinic
1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University

Mgr. Michaela Slussareff, Ph.D.
Institute of Information Studies and Librarianship, Faculty of Arts, Charles University & Slow Tech Institute, z.s.

Prof. Mgr. Steriani Elavsky, Ph.D.
Faculty of Education, University of Ostrava, principal investigator of the OP JAK project DigiWELL
- Excellent research in the field of digital technologies and wellbeing 

Mgr. David Lacko, Ph.D.
Psychological Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences

Mgr. Michal Kalman, Ph.D., Mgr. Petr Baďura, Ph.D.
Institute of Social Health, Palacký University Olomouc

PhDr. Jana Kvintová, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology and Pathopsychology, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc

doc. PhDr. René Szotkowski, Ph.D.
Institute for Research and Education in Digital Technologies and Cybersecurity, E-Bezpečí, Department of Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, Palacký University Olomouc

prof. Mgr. Jana Pelclová, Ph.D.
Institute of Active Lifestyle, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacký University Olomouc, principal investigator of the OP JAK project ReDiKid: Resilient Child in the Digital World

Mgr. Andrea Stašek, Ph.D.
Institute for Psychological Research, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University

prof. Mgr. Jiří Zounek, Ph.D.
Institute of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Masaryk University

doc. PhDr. Lucie Rohlíková, Ph.D.
Department of Computing and Didactic Technology, Faculty of Education, University of West Bohemia in Plzeň

Martin Kožíšek
Safer Internet Centre Czech Republic, CZ.NIC

Kateřina Vokrouhlíková,
head of the hotline STOPonline.cz, CZ.NIC

Soňa Petrášková
Helpline, z.s.