European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen just announced she'll draft a law this autumn to ban minors from social media across the EU — and she tipped her hand about who's really in the crosshairs: everyone.
The mechanism is "child protection," but the target is the architecture of online speech itself. Von der Leyen made that clear when she said the issue isn't "whether children can access social media" but "whether and when social media can access our children" — referring to what she called "predatory algorithms." That's not a safety measure. That's a declaration that the way platforms deliver content is the problem. And if the algorithm is the predator, the hunt doesn't stop at age 13.
An expert panel co-chaired by German psychiatrist Jörg Fegert and French epidemiologist Maria Melchior recommended an EU-wide delay of "social media plus" — a category broad enough to swallow video games and AI chatbots — for under-13s, with "phased and gradual access" by age range. Multiple EU nations want to go further: France is pushing for under-15s, Spain for under-16s. The Guardian highlighted these escalating restrictions; Politico noted that von der Leyen wants the EU to "start work on determining which platforms are harmful to minors" — an open-ended mandate to classify whatever they want.
Here's the tell: one expert admitted there's "not a lot of sound data" to set any age cutoff beyond 13, and a second expert flagged addictive risk extending to age 25. If the science is thin and the danger reaches adulthood, the precautionary principle doesn't protect children — it rationalizes controlling everyone.
The Commission has already opened cases against Meta and TikTok over "addictive" design features like infinite scroll, autoplay, and personalized feeds. Those aren't bugs. That's how speech and content work on the internet. Ban the algorithm, you ban the medium.
Estonia stands alone in objecting, arguing the focus should be on regulating platforms because kids will bypass bans anyway. They're right on both counts — and that's exactly why Brussels ignores them. A ban that doesn't work justifies the next intervention, and the one after that.
Von der Leyen compared her plan to seatbelts. Seatbelts restrain your body. This restrains your access to information. The distinction matters.
Australia already did it — blocking under-16s from Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, X, Snapchat, and TikTok. The template is global. The question for Americans is whether the First Amendment holds the line when the same coalition — bureaucrats, "expert" panels, and a press that launders the spin as protection — comes for the algorithm here.