Broadcasting Commission proposes sanctions for harming teens with tech
Published:Wednesday | January 28, 2026 | 12:06 AMKaren Madden/Gleaner Writer
Cordel Green, executive director of the Broadcasting Commission of Jamaica, is calling for civil and criminal sanctions against entities that – whether deliberately or inadvertently – make electronic devices and social media harmful to children.
Green made the call while contributing to a panel discussion following last week’s unveiling of a Teens and Technology Report by The University of Technology, Jamaica, which showed that the majority of teens using social media continue to increase in Jamaica, in keeping with global trends.
Last year, Australia enacted the world’s first comprehensive ban, prohibiting social media access for children under 16 on major platforms, while France, Denmark, Malaysia, Norway and the United Kingdom have either implemented far-reaching restrictions or are contemplating bans as early as this year.
Pointing to the days when marbles and gigs were the devices of choice, Green argued that social media, the playground of this generation, has been deliberately made addictive.
“But the marble was not devised to be addictive. The gig was not devised to be addictive. These [modern] devices, these toys, are intentionally devised to be addictive. So I believe there is a problem... . The point of departure must be ‘big tech’. It is the big technology companies that are making social media unsafe for children and making devices unsafe for our children,” Green told the audience.
He called for more draconian measures for a specific group.
SAFETY BY DESIGN
“We have to require safety by design. If you are creating a device ... you should say if it is going to be used by children, or there is a risk children are going to use it. You must incorporate child-safety filters.
“And then we come to the more difficult point. I really think it is about time now that we think about civil and criminal sanctions for anyone intentionally creating a device which is harmful to children, or negligent in allowing devices that can harm children.”
Green also pointed to other measures, including teaching Internet literacy as a means of ensuring that children are armed to protect themselves.
“I think the better solution is to embed digital media into literacy, into the curriculum, starting from kindergarten; that’s the first thing.”
However, even as Australia implemented a ban, Green insisted that was not a solution.
“That is responding to a symptom, not to a cause. But more fundamentally, especially in the case of a small developing island state, don’t talk about bans until you are absolutely sure you can be confident of enforcement. That is key. A ban is easy to put in place, but it can be dangerous. You [can] drive things underground.”
According to Green, banning a specific age group could create other problems, such as encouraging older children to be facilitators for children who can’t access the Internet.
“I am wondering whether we are creating enterprise for 16-year-olds. In other words, you ban 16 years old and under and inadvertently, you say to a 16- and 17-year-old, start to lease and sell social media hubs to those who are under 16. What’s more, if you are 14 or 15, you are merely postponing harm for 12 months.”
But the Broadcasting Commission executive director agrees with restrictions being put in place, such as those that exist for motorists while driving; or agencies, such as embassies and consular offices, which restrict the use of devices while on their premises.
“So it’s a legitimate question to ask whether we should be thinking about restriction in a school environment, and perhaps age-appropriate restrictions. But children enjoy a fundamental right to create and to receive information, so restrictions must be justified proportionately and evidence-based, and that’s why I believe the research is critical.”