.
Image: Mikhail Nilov/pexels
South Africa’s government is seriously weighing how to address the rising tide of online harm facing children and teens, including the possibility of restricting access to major platforms like TikTok and Instagram.
While no formal ban has been introduced, senior officials say creating strong age-based guardrails is increasingly part of the national conversation.
Communications Minister Solly Malatsi told Cape Talk that the harmful effects of social media, from cyberbullying to grooming and exposure to inappropriate content, have forced lawmakers to rethink how platforms operate locally.
He acknowledged that the moves of other countries, especially those of Australia and France, have informed South Africa’s deliberations.
“There is no doubt we live in an age of increased online harms… we’ve thought about what the countries are doing,” Malatsi said, emphasising that effective enforcement mechanisms must come before any restriction is considered.
Globally, several governments have already taken decisive action to limit youths’ access to social platforms. Australia, for example, recently enacted a law requiring major social media companies to block users under 16 unless strict age verification is carried out, with non-compliance attracting fines running into the tens of millions of Australian dollars.
These moves are part of a broader trend where countries such as Malaysia, France, Denmark, Norway, the UK, Germany, Italy, South Korea and others are exploring stricter rules, particularly around children’s use of social media.
Advocacy groups in South Africa have also called for tighter regulation, arguing that early exposure to smartphones and social platforms increases risks of grooming, cyber-harassment and mental-health strains linked to toxic online content.
Despite the international momentum, local experts and government officials caution that a blunt ban may not be practical in South Africa’s context.
Emma Sadleir, founder and CEO of the Digital Law Company, told MyBroadband that age-gating social platforms make sense in principle, likening it to how society regulates alcohol, cigarettes, and gambling, but noted that enforcement would be extremely challenging.
Sadleir explained that most major platforms have no office or legal presence in South Africa, making it difficult for authorities to impose and enforce fines or compliance orders. Without such jurisdictional leverage, she argued, any law might be “not worth the paper it’s written on.”
Minister Malatsi echoed these concerns, pointing out that even strict age-verification systems abroad have already been circumvented by users exploiting loopholes.
Rather than immediate restrictions, many stakeholders suggest that South Africa’s priority should be meaningful regulation that actually protects young people without oversimplifying the issue.
This could include:
Mandatory age verification and identity checks on social platforms targeting South African users,
Better safety-by-design features tuned for teens and pre-teens,
Collaboration with parents and schools on digital literacy and safe usage habits, and
Stronger partnerships with tech companies, even if they aren’t headquartered locally.
Child-welfare advocates have echoed this nuance. While police and education sectors are increasingly vocal about online harms and mental-health impacts, many warn that bans alone won’t address deeper issues such as digital addiction, online grooming, and the emotional stresses experienced by youth navigating hyper-connected spaces.
For now, South Africa is not on the brink of a TikTok or Instagram blackout.
However, the debate signals a broader shift in how governments around the world, and locally, are thinking about the responsibilities that tech platforms should have toward younger users.
Balancing safety, enforceability, rights to expression, and access to community remains a complex challenge with no easy answers.
As the global trend toward protecting minors from harmful digital environments continues to evolve, South Africa’s approach is likely to reflect both international learnings and domestic realities, with a clear focus on practical, enforceable policy rather than symbolic bans.