Written by Jyoti Putri – AIYA National Blog Editor

Translated into Bahasa Indonesia by Dhiah Rizka Raihani – AIYA National Translator. Click here to access the Bahasa Indonesia version.

The Indonesian Government officially begin restricting children under 16 from having social media accounts on March 28, 2026, not long after Australia’s under-16 social media ban took effect on December 10, 2025. The policy requires “high-risk” platforms, such as Instagram and TikTok, to deactivate and restrict accounts belonging to users under 16. Both governments claim that this is intended to protect young users from harm on social media and promote digital well-being. But if these policies are introduced in the name of children’s well-being, a more fundamental question needs to be asked: what does digital well-being actually mean for children and teenagers today?

What is Digital Wellbeing?

The World Health Organisation (WHO) describes well-being as a “resource for healthy living” and a “positive state of health” that is “more than the absence of illness,” enabling people to function well physically, psychologically, emotionally, and socially. Digital well-being, specifically, has been defined in various ways by different authorities. UNESCO refers to it as “the enhancement and improvement of human well-being, in the intermediate and long term, through the use of digital media.” Abeele describes it as a “subjective individual experience of optimal balance between the benefits and drawbacks obtained from mobile connectivity.” Google defines it similarly, as the ability to find a balance with technology so that it improves life rather than distracts from it. 

In other words, digital well-being is a state of having a healthy, balanced relationship with technology, ensuring that digital tools support rather than hinder physical, mental, and social health. 

This multifaceted construct encompasses various components. Powell (2022) identifies four main components of digital well-being, which are control, connection, content, and attention. Control refers to when and how we use technology, and whether that use aligns with our personal circumstances. Connection describes how and where we access technology, as well as the financial costs and opportunities associated with it. Content refers to what we spend time online, what we contribute to, how we communicate, and how we shape our online environment. Attention includes the ability to disengage from digital tools and platforms in line with our personal and broader values.

Digital well-being, therefore, should be at the core of concern when discussing young people’s use of social media, because good digital well-being means maximising the benefits of digital technology while minimising its harms.

How the Ban Supports Adolescents’ Digital Well-being

This tighter rule is obviously the governments’ response to young users’ real problems. Social media has been proven to give exposure access to negative content, cyberbullying, addiction, and misinformation especially to young users who usually have less psychological ability to differentiate content. Artificial Intelligence also exacerbates challenges in digital space due to its ability in content manipulation which is hard to differentiate from the actual information. Parents often report the difficulty in managing their children in this case, because there is a thin line between protecting them from digital harm and respecting their privacy. 

Indonesia’s Minister of Communications and Digital, Meutya Hafid, has described the ban on social media for children under 16 as a form of state involvement so that parents do not have to “fight alone combatting the giant algorithm.” From this perspective, the logic of the ban is understandable. By restricting access, the government also limits children’s exposure to some of the harmful effects of social media. It may also force children to take a break from endless scrolling and spend more time in real-life interactions, which could help strengthen their social skills and offline relationships. In that sense, the ban may support some aspects of digital well-being by reducing harmful exposure and encouraging healthier habits. 

How Do Young Users Really See Social Media and Digital Well-being?

However, young people’s own perspectives show that the issue is more complicated than simply reducing access. A research involving youths from 111 countries found that many young people see social media as “an instrument, like a knife, it depends on what you do with it.” They also described online spaces as inseparable from real life. 

Young people themselves recognise the harms. They report that social media encourages constant social comparison, both with peers and with influencers who often appear to have better lives. They also describe bullying as one of the most significant negative aspects of digital communication. Adolescents shared examples of bullies posting hurtful comments or spreading lies online, only to act as if nothing had happened during face-to-face interactions. In these situations, many wished for greater insight and guidance from parents and other adults. This shows that digital well-being also depends on whether children and teenagers are given the support needed to navigate harm, rather than being left to manage it alone.

At the same time, participants also agreed that social media can help them manage their well-being rather than only harm it. Social media allows them to maintain contact with friends anytime and anywhere, strengthening their interpersonal relationships. It also expands their ability to develop social connections beyond what is available offline, providing forms of social support that are important for well-being. As one girl from Chile said:

“You sometimes get stuck on the internet because there are people who you can get to know, who for example have the same interests, and there you no longer feel rejected… The people around you, they do not accept you… [The internet] can make you feel better, like you are not alone”

Research also suggests that social media-based and other digitally-based mental health interventions may also be more helpful for children and adolescents rather than offline interventions due to increased autonomy, privacy, and accessibility. These examples suggest that digital well-being for children and teenagers today also includes connection, belonging, autonomy, and access to support.

Digital well-being for children and teenagers today is also closely related to identity and self-expression. For many young people, social media is a space to explore who they are, express their thoughts and interests, and share their creativity with others. Whether through art, music, writing, videos, fashion, humour, or everyday self-presentation, these platforms can provide a sense of agency, recognition, and belonging. For example, for sexual minority youth, online spaces can be especially important for identity expression and connection when offline environments are less affirming. In this case, digital well-being is also about having digital spaces where young people can develop a sense of self, feel recognised, and participate meaningfully.

At the same time, these benefits of social media are usually seen if there is an active participation, rather than passively through habits such as doomscrolling. This means digital well-being is not only about access to technology, but also about the quality of young people’s online experiences and their ability to engage with digital spaces in healthy and intentional ways. 

Conclusion

If the Australian and Indonesian governments truly want to improve digital well-being among children and teenagers, then digital well-being must first be understood in a broader way. For young people today, it is not simply about spending less time online or being kept away from social media. It is about being safe, supported, connected, and able to use digital spaces in ways that contribute positively to their mental, social, and emotional lives. It is also about having the skills and guidance to respond to harm, set boundaries, and disengage when necessary.

Seen from this perspective, social media restrictions may address some risks, but they do not automatically create digital well-being on their own. Supporting young people to live well in a digital world requires more than limiting access. It requires education, support, safer platforms, and shared responsibility across governments, families, schools, and communities. If digital well-being is truly the goal, then the question is not only how to protect children and teenagers from harm, but how to create the conditions that allow them to use digital spaces in safer, healthier, and more meaningful ways.

References

Charmaraman, L., Hodes, R., & Richer, A. M. (2021). Young Sexual Minority Adolescent Experiences of Self-expression and Isolation on Social Media: Cross-sectional Survey Study. JMIR mental health, 8(9), e26207. https://doi.org/10.2196/26207 

esafety Commissioner. (2025). Social Media Age Restrictions. ESafety Commissioner. https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions 

Irfani, F. Pemerintah Indonesia larang anak di bawah 16 tahun bikin akun medsos – Bagaimana dengan verifikasi usia dan perlindungan data pribadinya? (2026, March 10). BBC News Indonesia. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/clyve80pj7eo 

Kruzan, K. P., Williams, K. D. A., Meyerhoff, J., Yoo, D. W., O’Dwyer, L. C., De Choudhury, M., & Mohr, D. C. (2022). Social media-based interventions for adolescent and young adult mental health: A scoping review. Internet Interventions, 30(30), 100578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2022.100578 

Mao, J., Fu, G. X., & Huang, J. J. (2023). The double-edged sword effects of active social media use on loneliness: The roles of interpersonal satisfaction and fear of missing out. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1108467. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1108467 

Marsden, P. (2020, July 17). What is Digital Wellbeing? A List of Definitions. Digitalwellbeing.org. https://digitalwellbeing.org/what-is-digital-wellbeing-a-list-of-definitions/ 

Masri-Zada, T., Martirosyan, S., Abdou, A., Barbar, R., Kades, S., Makki, H., Haley, G., & Agrawal, D. K. (2025). The Impact of Social Media & Technology on Child and Adolescent Mental Health. Journal of psychiatry and psychiatric disorders, 9(2), 111–130. 

Sari, A. P. “Social media is like fire”: Some wish Indonesia’s planned social media ban for youths can come sooner. (2025). CNA. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/asia/indonesia-social-media-ban-under-16-parents-5986856 

Volkan Tayiz, Vangölü, M. S., Halil İbrahim Özok, & Fuat Tanhan. (2025). Concept of Digital Well-being. Psikiyatride Guncel Yaklasimlar – Current Approaches in Psychiatry, 17(4), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1544897 

World Health Organization. (n.d.). Promoting well-being. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/activities/promoting-well-being Ziegel, L., Sjöland, C. F., Zuo, X., Fine, S. L., & Ekström, A. M. (2025). Adolescent Mental Health and Digital Communication: Perspectives From 11 Countries. Journal of Adolescent Health, 77(3), 405–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2024.02.037