From One Extreme to the Other in the Name of Protecting Kids Online - What The Heck!
- The White Hatter
- 1 minute ago
- 2 min read
At The White Hatter, we have been clear and consistent about our concerns with blanket age-gating legislation, particularly the push to lock social media behind a hard cutoff at 16yrs (1)(2). Our position has never been about resisting protection, it has been about effectiveness. Age gates focus on access while largely ignoring the design choices, business models, and incentives that create risk for both youth and adults in the first place.
Recently, we saw a very different approach emerge on the global stage. New child digital safety laws introduced in the United Arab Emirates shift the responsibility in a completely different direction (3). Rather than restricting access, these laws place significant legal obligations on parents and caregivers for their child’s online activity.
As of January 1, 2026, online safety in the UAE is now a formal legal duty for parents, guardians, and anyone responsible for a child’s wellbeing when that child uses digital devices or online services.
Under this framework, caregivers are legally expected to actively supervise online use, rely on parental controls, select age-appropriate platforms, protect their child’s data and dignity, educate them about safe and healthy digital habits, and report harmful content to authorities. The law goes beyond encouraging involvement, it legally requires it, while also obligating authorities to create systems to help families comply.
Here is where we pause.
We agree that parents and caregivers play a critical role and in guiding and supporting their children online. We have built our entire educational approach around that reality. However, turning parental and caregiver responsibility into a legal obligation does not address the root of the problem. It still leaves the design of digital products largely untouched.
Age gating laws fail because they offload responsibility onto access control, while allowing platforms to continue building products that monetize attention, data, and engagement in ways that increase risk. Laws that criminalize or legally burden parents swing the pendulum just as far in the opposite direction, placing the weight of a complex digital ecosystem on families who did not design it and do not control it.
In both cases, the companies that build and profit from these platforms remain largely insulated from accountability for how their products function, and that is the core issue.
We believe meaningful protection for youth requires a balanced legislative approach. One that holds technology companies accountable for safer design by default, transparent data practices, and youth appropriate safeguards. One that recognizes the important role parents, caregivers, youth, and teens play without turning parenting into a compliance exercise. One that focuses on shared responsibility rather than extreme solutions that miss the mark.
Protecting kids online should not be about choosing between banning access or blaming families. It should be about building systems that respect the individual needs of child development, support parents and caregivers, and finally require big tech to carry its share of the responsibility.
Digital Food For Thought
The White Hatter
Facts Not Fear, Facts Not Emotions, Enlighten Not Frighten, Know Tech Not No Tech
