The online safety advocate firmly stated that reinforcing the current legal framework offers a more precise means of protecting minors than implementing an immediate prohibition on all social media usage under the age of sixteen. By focusing on the existing statutes that govern user consent, content moderation, and platform accountability, the advocate argued, penalties for non‑compliance would reach those responsible and encourage compliance without disrupting the digital ecosystem excessively. bEnforcing/b these laws, the position holds, signals a clear legal boundary that libraries, schools, and parents can reference when addressing inappropriate content or harmful interactions.

_2_ While supporters of a blanket ban frame the measure as a protective front against unobstructed access to risky or misleading material, the advocate highlighted that blanket approaches often undercut parental authority and can lead to unintended consequences, such as fans negotiating access or turning to unregulated channels. the message emphasizes a measured response that incorporates both educational initiatives and monitoring mechanisms tailored to the age group’ risk profiles. By adopting a stance that prioritizes legislative reinforcement, stakeholders can stimulate collaborative oversight, ensuring safety measures adapt to new platforms and technologies.

_3_ Future webinars and policy briefs are scheduled to further explore the optimal mix of enforcement and outreach, aiming to sort out the financial implications of different approaches to content regulation for minors. The advocate insists that solidifying the enforcement of existing laws remains the most effective step toward safeguarding digital citizenship for younger users. This stance has attracted attention from a range of civil‑rights groups, policy analysts, and educational strata seeking a balanced approach to online safety.