Our Children Are Being Raised by Algorithms

There is a major change that often escapes our attention. All this time, children have been considered to grow up primarily with family, school, and their social environment. That assumption is not wrong. However, today there is another ‘caregiver’ that is silently helping to shape the way our children think, their tastes, emotions, and even their habits: the algorithm.

Indonesian children live in a world that is almost inseparable from screens. They learn, play, seek entertainment, communicate, and build their imagination about the world through gadgets. Data from the Central Statistics Agency shows that in 2024, 78.63% of children aged 5–17 years had used a mobile phone. Even 35.57% of children aged 0–6 years have been exposed to the internet. This figure is not merely a technological statistic; it is a sign that childhood now takes place in two worlds simultaneously: the physical realm and the digital realm.

The internet certainly opens up vast opportunities. Children can learn languages, science, art, and even artificial intelligence from various sources. However, this same space also brings risks: cyberbullying, pornography, data theft, screen addiction, and an instant culture that weakens critical thinking resilience. UNICEF has previously recorded high levels of exposure among Indonesian children to sexual content and cyberbullying. The digital issue for children is no longer a private family matter, but a public concern that will determine the quality of future generations. The question is, are we educating our children to become intelligent digital citizens, or are we letting them be raised by machines designed to maximise attention?

Social media does not work like a textbook. A textbook is structured with educational objectives, a curriculum, and pedagogical responsibility. In contrast, algorithms are designed to retain user attention for as long as possible. The longer someone stays on a screen, the more valuable they become to the digital platform. Therefore, what is often prioritised is not the most educational content, but the content most capable of provoking attention. Content that makes one curious, triggers emotions, or encourages high engagement will more easily appear repeatedly. In this digital economic logic, human attention becomes a contested commodity.

For adults, this situation is already a challenge. For children, the risks are far greater. They do not yet fully possess the ability to control impulses, filter information, and understand the long-term consequences of what they see and do in the digital space. This is where the problem lies. Children do not just use applications; they are also studied by the applications. Their viewing patterns, emotional responses, clicking habits, and usage time become material for the algorithm to determine subsequent content. If family and school are not sufficiently present, the algorithm slowly takes over part of the caregiving function: determining what the child often sees, which emotions are frequently triggered, and what values are considered normal.

It is this concern that underpins the birth of various child protection regulations in the digital space, including Government Regulation No. 17 of 2025 on the Governance of Electronic System Operation in Child Protection (PP Tunas). This regulation demonstrates that child protection in the 21st century cannot be sufficiently carried out at home and school alone, but must also be present in the digital space. Restricting children’s access to high-risk platforms must be understood within this protection framework. Children cannot be treated the same as adults when dealing with technology designed to be highly persuasive and addictive.

However, restriction alone will not be enough. Children live in a digital age and cannot be completely kept away from technology. Prohibition without alternatives will only breed backdoor solutions: fake accounts, using parents’ accounts, or access that becomes increasingly difficult to monitor. Therefore, the real policy challenge is not just to restrict, but to provide substitution. Children must not only be kept away from risky digital spaces; they must also be brought closer to digital spaces that are safe, engaging, and educational. This is where schools need to play a more strategic role: not just conducting surveillance, but building a healthy digital literacy culture.

In this context, the steps taken by the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education are worth noting. Through various digital education transformation policies, including the Joint Decree of Seven Ministers on Guidelines for the Utilisation of Digital Technology and Artificial Intelligence, the government is trying to take a middle path: protecting children from digital risks without distancing them from the future of technology. This approach is crucial because the future cannot be separated from digital technology. Indonesian children cannot just be passive users. They need to understand how technology works, get to know coding, understand artificial intelligence, and possess computational thinking skills that will be one of the essential competencies of the 21st century.

However, technical proficiency without digital ethics can breed new problems. A child might be adept at using AI but not understand plagiarism. They might quickly create content but not necessarily understand communication ethics and privacy. Therefore, digital education must go hand in hand with character education. This approach is beginning to be visible in the policy direction of the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education. On one hand, students are introduced to coding and AI; on the other, the importance of digital ethics, emotional resilience, and social responsibility in the digital space is reinforced.