On August 26, Meta agreed to pay up to $17.1 billion to resolve child-harm claims brought by a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general across the United States, its territories and the District of Columbia. It is one of the largest consumer-protection settlements in internet history. More importantly, it marks a turning point in the debate over whether social-media platforms knowingly exposed children to harm in pursuit of growth and profit.The case placed Meta’s design choices under legal scrutiny: How its products encouraged prolonged use, how teen safety-features were presented to the public, and how the company understood the risks its platforms created for young users. Meta denies wrongdoing. But the settlement demonstrates that voluntary self-regulation is no substitute for enforceable accountability.AdvertisementUnder the proposed settlement, Meta must adopt stronger safeguards for users under 18, including default time limits, restrictions on nighttime use, limits on notifications during school hours, enhanced age-assurance measures and independent compliance oversight. These are not cosmetic changes. They go to the core of how Facebook and Instagram are allowed to operate for minors.If American children now receive court-backed protection from harmful platform design, why should Indian children not receive the same assurance of safety?This settlement does not mean that Meta has solved the problem. A company that generated $201 billion in revenue in 2025 can absorb $17 billion paid over 10 years. That Meta stock was up 5 per cent after the settlement proves that this settlement has little or no punitive impact on the company. The mandated safety reforms are meaningful, but overdue. Most critically, the settlement protects American children under American law, through American prosecutors. It does not cover India’s 350 million young users. The same platforms operate here. The same recommendation systems shape what children see. The same incentives reward attention, engagement and prolonged use. Yet India has not seen comparable legal action, compelled disclosure or court-supervised reform.AdvertisementThat is not because the harm is less serious in India. It is because our debate on platform harm has remained episodic and inconclusive. A tragedy occurs, outrage follows, a platform issues a statement, a parliamentary question may be asked — and then silence returns. American litigation broke that cycle. India now needs a legal process capable of compelling the same disclosure.Disclosure was the most important outcome of the US case. Court-compelled discovery forced Meta to produce internal research, design documents and communications about child safety — under oath, in public, and subject to cross-examination. A serious legal action in Indian courts would compel answers to questions like:What does Meta’s internal research show about mental-health impact on Indian teenage girls? How does the recommendation engine behave in Hindi, Tamil, and Bengali for a 14-year-old at 11 pm? How many Indian children under 13 are active on platforms that legally prohibit their membership? What is the scale of child-sexual-abuse material affecting Indian users, and how is it reported? In the US alone, 7.5 million materials were under internal review.Were the same addictive design features applied to Indian users? If yes, Indian users have been subjected to harm with no protection.The answers exist — in Meta’s servers, internal research databases and executive communications. The only way to obtain them is through the courts. India has the legal foundation to act: The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules 2021, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), the Juvenile Justice Act and the Constitution of India. We need not wait for new legislation.The Safe, Trusted and Accountable framework developed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government in 2021 — of which I was a part — was designed for this purpose: To ensure that platforms operating at scale bear legal responsibility for the consequences of their design choices. The conduct alleged in the American cases fails that standard.India needs to coordinate a national legal strategy. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights should launch a formal inquiry with discovery powers, compelling platforms to produce India-specific safety research, algorithm documentation, data on underage users, and internal-harm research.Affected families in India can approach consumer forums and high courts directly, too. Parliament must pass legislation creating a statutory right to algorithmic disclosure — requiring platforms to reveal, to a designated Indian authority, their content moderation policies, recommendation engine parameters, and child-safety research for Indian users. Last, state governments should file coordinated consumer protection and child-safety suits against these platforms in Indian courts.A single pioneering state can trigger a national movement.you may likeThe US settlement is a beginning. For too long, global platforms have operated in India with less scrutiny, weaker oversight and lower public awareness than they face in the West. They have profited enormously from India’s young users while bearing little legal accountability.The settlement is America’s answer to what social media has done to its children. India must now find its own answers. The shadow debate must end. The harm is real. The platforms know it. Legal tools exist. It’s time to act decisively to make all platforms safe, trusted and accountable.The writer, former MP, former minister of state for Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India, is BJP Kerala state president and MLA for Nemom.He begins a fortnightly column. Views are personal