"Social Media Ban Until Age 15": France's Bold Experiment with "Digital Age of Majority"

It's not about taking smartphones away from children. It's about closing the gateway to the "society" within smartphones through legislation.

France has taken a step towards a large-scale digital regulation, which is rare globally.

On July 21, 2026, the French Parliament passed a bill that principally bans children under 15 from accessing social media. Both the Senate and the National Assembly approved the bill, making France the first European country to legislate a nationwide SNS ban for those under 15.

This policy has been long advocated by President Emmanuel Macron, and as early as September 1, when the new school term begins, the creation of new accounts will be restricted. Platforms will also be required to suspend or delete accounts held by those under 15 within a certain period.

The law further includes a ban on the use of mobile phones within high schools. In France, the use of mobile phones is already restricted in elementary and middle schools, and this extends the restriction to high schools.

However, just because the bill has passed through parliament does not mean everything will change simultaneously on September 1. There are still procedures regarding the review by the Constitutional Council and alignment with the EU's Digital Services Act. The actual implementation period and methods may change.

What France is attempting is not merely a youth protection policy. It is a societal experiment involving age, anonymity, privacy, freedom of expression, parental responsibility, and the obligations of large IT companies.

Holding platforms accountable, not children

The crucial aspect of this law is that it does not focus on directly punishing children or guardians who violate it.

The obligation to prevent use by those under 15 is placed on the platforms operating the SNS. Operators must verify that users meet the age requirements and refuse account creation if they do not.

The same applies to existing accounts. According to reports, platforms will be given an additional four-month grace period after enforcement to identify and suspend accounts of users deemed under 15.

Certain sites and functions, such as encyclopedias and services for educational and scientific purposes, are exempt. The issue is not simply viewing information online, but services that encourage prolonged stays through user interaction, public posting, and content recommendations based on activity history.

Many SNS platforms have set the minimum age in their terms of use to around 13. However, a system that only requires entering a date of birth at registration cannot prevent children from falsifying their age.

This law demands a shift from the conventional system of "register if you declare yourself over 13" to a system where platforms actively verify age.

In other words, the law does not allow SNS companies to shift the blame by saying "the child falsified their age" and instead holds them accountable for verifying if users are truly over 15.

The underlying concern that parents alone cannot prevent

The strong measures taken by the French government are driven by the concern that the information children encounter on SNS cannot be managed solely by family efforts.

Cyberbullying, sexual extortion, extreme videos, posts encouraging self-harm, content related to eating disorders, and videos glamorizing illegal drugs or dangerous acts. Such information can appear on screens through recommendation algorithms even if children do not actively search for it.

Notifications aimed at extending usage time, endless videos, numerical "likes," and images promoting comparisons with others. The impact of such designs, which can easily capture the attention of adults, can be more severe on children whose emotions and self-esteem are still developing.

In France, there have been cases where families have sued platforms, claiming harmful content on SNS was related to children's self-harm or suicide.

Parents and support groups advocating for the bill have voiced that "rules within each family alone cannot compete with global IT companies" and that society should restrict children's access like alcohol and tobacco.

Even if parents set usage limits on their children's smartphones, they cannot manage their friends' devices. If the strictness of rules varies by household, children with stricter restrictions may feel left out of friendships.

Drawing a uniform age line by the state also means "reducing differences between households."

President Macron has previously expressed that SNS has become a "jungle" that distracts young people and argued that children need to reclaim time to grow and think as citizens.

The underlying idea is not to hold children accountable but to question the responsibility of companies that have turned children's attention into profit.

The "SNS ban" welcomed on SNS

The decision was as symbolic as the policy itself.

President Macron announced the parliamentary approval of the SNS ban for those under 15 through a post on SNS.

A policy regulating SNS is praised, shared, and debated on SNS. This contradictory scene indicates that modern society cannot easily detach from SNS.

Reactions to the president's announcement and news articles included opinions welcoming the policy to restrict children's use.

Posts expressed sentiments like "It should have been implemented sooner," "Children don't need unlimited SNS," and "Responsibility shouldn't be solely placed on schools and families."

Particularly, parents who have struggled with children watching short videos for hours or checking notifications late at night showed strong support.

Some users argued that not only should those under 15 be banned, but infinite scrolling and autoplay should be restricted regardless of age. They believe that as long as the design that fosters dependency remains, the problem is merely postponed.

There are also opinions that "it is not the user's age but the recommendation algorithms used by companies that should be regulated." Even among supporters of the ban, there are differing views on what should be regulated.

Concerns that "protecting children" could lead to identity verification for all users

The most significant concern on SNS is the method of age verification.

To exclude those under 15, it must be confirmed that those attempting to use the service are over 15. Since it's difficult to verify only children, all new users, including adults, may undergo some form of age verification.

In Reddit communities, where users value privacy, concerns were posted such as "I'd quit SNS rather than submit an ID" and "It would mean entrusting a large amount of ID data to private companies."

If images of driver's licenses or IDs are stored on each platform, the damage from information leaks or misuse would be significant. Moreover, there is distrust that the system introduced for age verification might be used for real-name verification, identifying posters, or tracking activity history in the future.

Particularly on topics difficult to discuss without anonymity, such as politics, religion, health, sexual orientation, and labor issues, identity verification could stifle expression.

For this reason, voices on SNS view the law not as "child protection" but as an "entry point to end anonymity on the internet."

However, age verification does not necessarily mean a real-name system.

The European Commission is developing a system that proves only the fact that the necessary age is exceeded without providing names, birthdates, or ID numbers to platforms.

For example, if a third-party organization verifies the user's age and only sends the result "over 15" to the SNS side, the platform does not need to know the real name. Encryption technology is also being considered to prevent tracking the same person across multiple services.

France's data protection authority has also indicated that if age verification is conducted, it should handle only the minimum necessary information, and it is preferable that SNS companies do not directly collect IDs.

The issue is whether a theoretically possible system can be used nationwide by September.

Can VPNs and "age falsification" be prevented?

Discussions on SNS have early on addressed ways to circumvent the regulations.

A representative method is using a VPN to appear as if connecting from outside France. The speculation is that using a connection point in another country might avoid the age verification screen for France.

Other methods include borrowing a family member's account, having an older friend register, purchasing a used account, or moving to small-scale services not covered by the regulations.

Strengthening regulations might lead children to move to services with higher anonymity or communities less monitored. If exclusion from major SNS results in being guided to more dangerous places, the policy could have the opposite effect.

In online discussions within France, even supporters of the ban have raised questions like "How will VPNs and age falsification be prevented?" and "Won't tech-savvy children easily bypass it?"

In response, supporters of regulation argue, "Even if it can't be completely prevented, reducing users has meaning," and "Age restrictions on alcohol and tobacco aren't perfect, but that doesn't mean laws are unnecessary."

The inability to enforce regulations 100% doesn't equate to them being ineffective. The idea is that changing from an easily accessible state to one requiring some form of circumvention can delay the start of use.

For children, SNS is not just a "harmful place"

Among opposing opinions, the presence of children using SNS to connect with friends and society cannot be overlooked.

In a public debate, it was pointed out that for those under 15, SNS might be "the only place to freely talk with friends."

For children living in rural areas, those who cannot go out frequently, those isolated at school, those who cannot consult about their problems at home, and those with rare diseases or disabilities, online communities can be an important support.

Sexual minorities and young people with few people around them sharing the same cultural background might find it safe to share their concerns for the first time in anonymous communities.

While SNS contains dangerous information, it also serves as a place for learning, creation, social participation, finding peers, and consultation. Blocking all SNS indiscriminately could result in losing not only dangerous information but also necessary connections for children.

Experts in developmental psychology also caution against viewing the relationship between SNS and mental health as a simple causal relationship.

It's not just that long usage leads to poor health; existing loneliness or anxiety may lead to longer SNS usage. It's challenging to separate multiple factors such as home environment, economic status, school life, lack of sleep, and lifestyle changes after pandemics.

A uniform ban could risk depriving children in need of support of consultation avenues. Thus, opinions suggest combining age-based blocking with stopping harmful recommendations, expanding consultation services, and media literacy education.

The numerical discrepancy shown by Australia, a forerunner

France is looking to Australia's system as a reference.

In December 2025, Australia began a system restricting account ownership for those under 16. According to the government's online safety authority, millions of underage accounts were deleted or suspended from targeted platforms shortly after the system's introduction.

Judging by this number alone, the regulation appears to have achieved significant results.

However, early research published in 2026 reported a different picture.

A survey by a research team from Newcastle University and others found that over 85% of young people in the target age group continued to use regulated SNS even after the system's introduction. Although more young people experienced age verification, many existing accounts were not discovered, or access continued through other means.

Another survey also found that many children who continued to use SNS said avoiding the regulations was "easy."

This indicates that the number of deleted accounts does not equate to actual usage rates.

If one person has multiple accounts, the number of deletions increases. Some services allow video viewing without an account. New accounts can be created immediately after deletion.

On the other hand, it cannot be concluded that the entire policy is a failure based solely on early research. Not enough time has passed since the system's introduction, and platform detection technology and young people's behavior may change.

Australia's experience shows the need to measure not "whether it was banned" but "whether usage time decreased," "whether contact with harmful information decreased," and "whether sleep and mental state improved."

If France only announces the number of deleted accounts as a success, there is a risk of misjudging the reality of the system.

Will France or the EU enforce the law?

Another major issue is who will oversee the giant platforms.

Services like Meta, TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat, and X operate across borders. Even if France enacts laws domestically, it is not straightforward to directly command companies based overseas.

In the EU, the Digital Services Act allows the European Commission to oversee safety measures and risk management for large platforms. Targeted advertising to minors is prohibited, and platforms are obliged to ensure children's privacy, safety, and security at high standards.

Therefore, if France's unique laws overlap or conflict with the EU's common system, legal adjustments will be necessary.

In the past, France enacted a law requiring parental consent for SNS registration for those under 15, but it could not be fully implemented due to its relationship with EU law and lack of age verification technology.

This law is not something that will be completed solely within France.

Rather, France aims to present its system as a precedent and influence EU-wide regulation. Discussions on restricting children's SNS use are progressing in Spain, Denmark, Greece, the UK, Canada, and other countries.

If France's system functions effectively, the prospect of a common European age restriction becomes more realistic. Conversely, if constitutional issues, privacy violations, or regulatory evasion cause the system to stall, it will affect policies in other countries.

What determines success or failure is not "prohibition" but the design that follows

The debate over France's new law can easily appear as a choice between "protecting children or protecting freedom."

However, the real issue is not there.

There is little disagreement about the need to protect children. The issue is which method can enhance safety without excessively harming other rights.

Not forcing the submission of IDs for age verification. Adopting a system where platforms do not need to know users' real names. Ensuring collected information is not used for advertising or recommendations. Providing an opportunity to appeal for mistakenly suspended accounts. Keeping safe services for children to use for consultation and learning.