In Focus: Digital Childhoods, Regulatory Choices
In Aakhya Weekly #172, we covered the rapid digitalisation of Indian systems and how that transformation has exposed the country to an increasing cascade of cyber threats. We examined the major cyberattacks the nation has suffered in recent years, the vulnerabilities they revealed across sectors, and the broader implications for governance, economic stability, and national security. Now that an Indian context for the development of cyber protection has been introduced, it makes sense to widen the lens and add a global dimension to the discussion. Cyber risks are inherently transnational, and understanding how other nations are building their response strategies can provide valuable comparative insights while situating India within the larger international cybersecurity landscape.
The Global Push for Child Digital Safety
Few issues in digital governance are as contested as online safety for children. The question is not whether protection is necessary, but how it should be implemented. Social media platforms thrive on anonymity. Users rarely present their full identities or intentions, and this ambiguity creates an environment where children inherently impressionable and often unaware of risks, are especially vulnerable. Add to this the steady flow of mature, illicit, or harmful content online, and the dangers become evident.
So how should a nation respond?
The Online Safety Act 2023 was the United Kingdom’s answer. Positioned as landmark legislation, it introduced sweeping obligations for platforms, search engines, and pornographic websites. Companies were required to conduct risk assessments, remove harmful content, redesign certain features, and, most notably, introduce age verification mechanisms. Non-compliance could invite fines of up to 10% of global revenue.
Platforms were expected to implement proportionate measures following these assessments, including algorithmic adjustments, strengthened content moderation, and expanded user controls. The compliance deadlines were set for March 2025, with additional amendments reinforcing age restrictions and verification requirements. Parental controls, clearer age limits, and mandatory verification services became central pillars of the framework.
In theory, the approach appears comprehensive. In practice, implementation and enforcement are far more complex. But before dissecting its drawbacks, however, a more pressing question emerges: how might such a framework translate into the Indian context?
India’s Regulatory Trajectory: A Parallel Path?
As discussed earlier, India has steadily built a regulatory foundation to address emerging digital threats. The Information Technology Act, 2000, laid the groundwork, followed by the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Most recently, the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2026, introduced provisions targeting synthetic or AI-generated content, mandating clear labelling disclosures.
This amendment followed a troubling online trend on X, where users misused the platform’s native AI tool ‘Grok’ to morph publicly available images, including those of minors, into obscene content. The incident underscored the urgency of regulating AI-enabled manipulation and reinforced the government’s awareness of child safety concerns in digital spaces.
There were also broader legislative ambitions. To bolster protection and data in India, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) was introduced in 2023. The enacted Act was actually meant to be one of the foundational steps of the proposed Digital India Bill, which aimed to further modernise India’s digital governance architecture and replace the original Information Technology Act, 2000. Its objectives mirrored elements of the UK framework: online safety, cybersecurity, AI governance, risk-based platform classification, algorithmic transparency, and stricter rules for emerging technologies such as deepfakes. However, after rounds of stakeholder consultation, no draft was tabled in Parliament. Additional proposals, including the SHIELD Bill 2025, which sought to restrict social media access for children under 13, also faced delays in the Lok Sabha this month alone. Taken together, these initiatives suggest that India has indeed contemplated a trajectory similar to that of the UK’s Online Safety Act or even Australia’s Online Safety Amendment Act. Yet decisive movement toward mandatory age verification and expansive risk assessments has not materialised.
The Implementation Dilemma
One reason lies in the backlash experienced by early adopters of such legislation. A major criticism of the UK’s approach was the ambiguity surrounding “legal but harmful” content, a phrase broad enough to blur distinctions between legitimate criticism, dissent, misinformation, and hate speech. The platforms, out of fear of the ‘Damocles sword’ of heavy penalties, could default to over-censorship, chilling genuine public discourse. Another contentious provision involved the scanning of encrypted messages to detect illicit material or terrorist content. While the intention was security-driven, critics argued that undermining end-to-end encryption on platforms such as WhatsApp risked mass surveillance and fundamental breaches of privacy.
Age verification posed its own challenges. Requiring both adults and minors to upload government identification and biometric data to private companies, many of which are frequent targets of data breaches, raised significant concerns. Citizens were understandably hesitant to entrust sensitive personal data to digital ecosystems that are themselves still evolving. In the Indian context, these concerns are amplified. While digital infrastructure has advanced rapidly, regulatory systems are still maturing. Mandating large-scale uploads of identification data could introduce vulnerabilities at a time when resilience is still being strengthened.
There is also a practical reality: technologically adept youth often find ways around age restrictions. Virtual private networks, borrowed credentials, and alternative platforms can render verification systems little more than temporary barriers. Although India may appear behind in the regulatory race against emerging digital threats, that delay may offer a strategic advantage. Watching other nations experiment with sweeping legislation provides valuable lessons, not only on what works but also about what falters. Perhaps it is fortunate that the Digital India Bill was not rushed forward without fully grappling with its potential drawbacks. Whether by design or circumstance, the pause has created space for clearer definitions, stronger safeguards, and more balanced enforcement mechanisms. As India continues to refine its digital governance model, the question is not simply whether it should emulate frameworks like the UK’s or Australia’s. Rather, it is whether it can craft a version uniquely suited to its scale, diversity, and developmental stage, one that protects children without compromising privacy, innovation, or democratic discourse.
The coming years will reveal whether India transforms regulatory caution into regulatory clarity.
Top Stories of the Week
Hello Future Cities: Kerala Sets the Pace
Kerala has become the first Indian state to formally adopt a comprehensive urban policy, marking a major step toward structured and future-ready city development. The policy is designed to guide sustainable urbanisation across the state and respond to rapid urban expansion, infrastructure gaps, environmental stress, and emerging quality-of-life concerns. It promotes integrated spatial planning, improved civic infrastructure, affordable housing, efficient and accessible public transport, scientific waste management, and climate-resilient urban systems.
The framework seeks to ensure balanced regional development, stronger urban governance, and coordinated action among urban local bodies. It also underscores participatory planning, with inputs from experts, institutions, and community stakeholders incorporated during the drafting process. By shifting from fragmented schemes to a long-term strategic roadmap, Kerala aims to build economically dynamic, environmentally sustainable, and socially inclusive urban centres that enhance resilience, investment potential, and overall livability for its growing urban population.
India to Add 20,000 GPUs, Signalling Next Phase of National AI Infrastructure Expansion
At the India AI Impact Summit 2026, Union Electronics and IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw announced that India will add 20,000 GPUs to its existing 38,000, significantly expanding the country’s AI compute capacity. The move marks the next phase of the IndiaAI Mission and reinforces the government’s strategy of building sovereign, democratised AI infrastructure accessible to more than a handful of large firms.
Positioning AI as central to India’s growth trajectory, the Minister projected over $200 billion in AI investments over the next two years and highlighted that India now ranks among the top three AI nations globally, according to Stanford University. Several indigenous AI models unveiled at the Summit were benchmarked competitively against leading global systems. The government also emphasised responsible AI deployment through a techno-legal framework, with the AI Safety Institute partnering with academic institutions to prevent misuse, while advancing semiconductor design, clean energy-powered data centres, and nationwide AI reskilling initiatives.
A Few Good Reads
Mekala Krishnan and Kanmani Chockalingam argue that India must urgently invest in climate adaptation to protect its economy, productivity, and vulnerable populations as rising climate risks could otherwise slow long-term growth and development.
C. Raja Mohan writes that Emmanuel Macron’s visit reflects Delhi and Paris charting a “third way” that deepens strategic cooperation and expands India’s geopolitical autonomy across traditional divides.
Simon Book portrays Mark Zuckerberg as increasingly driven by power and control, shifting from a conciliatory image to a more ruthless approach in shaping technology and AI.
Marc Champion highlights that the US is handling two very different peace negotiations— a deal with Iran could avoid war, and a Ukraine settlement would mean forcing Kyiv to accept punitive terms and would not ensure lasting peace.
Surinder Sud examines how high-yielding crops ended hunger, but often at a nutritional cost, stressing that a stronger funding and policy push is vital to improve nutritional security through biofortified crops.