The government’s announcement of the formation of a national committee to protect children and adolescents from the dangers of social media platforms and the Internet should be read as a pivotal moment, not a passing administrative measure. We are facing a possible transition from sectoral dealing with “Internet problems” to dealing with them as a state issue that affects education, mental health, societal security, and the structure of public values.

The real test is not in forming the committee, but in the mental transformation that must accompany it: moving from the logic of partial treatment to building an integrated national system for managing digital risks. This is the difference between a symbolic move and a strategic move.

The issue today is not technical as much as it is political and institutional. The central question is: Will the state treat the digital space as a service capable of limited regulation, or will it realize that it is a space that reshapes society and affects the formation of humans, and thus calls for a comprehensive state policy?

The title “Protecting Children from the Dangers of Digital Platforms” should be a gateway to a broader national project, not a ceiling. The required project goes beyond blocking and filters to rethink the state’s relationship with the digital sphere: how to regulate it, how to monitor it, and how to balance freedom and protection, and between innovation and responsibility.

Jordan – as a country with institutional depth and a well-established political culture – should not be satisfied with circumstantial solutions or formalities. What is required is to build a system that makes digital protection a part of the state’s structure, just as health, education, and security are.

In this context, it becomes clear that the file of artificial intelligence and the digital space is no longer a marginal technical matter. The presence of these issues at the core of the national agenda, and the increasing interest of His Highness Crown Prince Hussein bin Abdullah II in them, indicate an awareness that digital transformation – including artificial intelligence and the Internet – is a strategic lever for the future of education, the economy, and the building of the Jordanian human being.

From this standpoint, the committee’s work should be based on three clear pillars:

First: Moving from crisis management to risk management.
It is not enough to intervene after the damage has occurred; What is required are proactive mechanisms that identify risks early, build scenarios, and put in place prevention tools before challenges turn into social or security crises.

Second: Transforming wisdom into law.
Wisdom is necessary, but it is not sufficient if it is not translated into clear and enforceable legislation. Digital childhood protection cannot be left hostage to individual intentions or efforts. We need an explicit legal framework that regulates platforms, defines the responsibilities of service providers, sets clear red lines, and prevents evasion of accountability.

Third: Linking digitalization to the human building project.
The issue is not just protection of content, but rather protection of the process of forming the Jordanian citizen. This requires linking the work of the committee to the system of education, health, psychological care, and value education, so that digitization does not remain a separate file, but rather part of a national project to prepare a generation that is aware, balanced, and capable of critical thinking.

On this basis, the required roadmap should include – as a minimum – the following:
1. Formulate a written and announced national strategy for managing digital risks to children, with clear timelines and performance indicators.
2. Preparing a package of binding legislation that regulates the work of the platforms, protects minors, and imposes standards of transparency and responsibility.
3. Establishing a permanent specialized body with real powers, not a temporary committee without implementation tools.
4. Integrating digital education into the educational system as a basic citizenship skill, not a marginal subject.
5. Periodic accountability mechanisms before Parliament and public opinion, to ensure that decisions turn into measurable results.

What we are presenting here is not an isolated position, but rather an episode in a broader discussion about the state’s relationship with the digital age: a discussion that began with education in the age of artificial intelligence, and passed through the question of age and the limits of access to platforms, and reached the necessity of redefining the governance of the digital space itself. These intersecting paths converge at one supreme goal: to protect children, strengthen education, and regulate the Internet, without breaking the spirit of innovation or ignoring the reality of the world in which we live.

Digital childhood protection is not a sectoral issue, but a state issue. The Internet today is not a luxury; It is an infrastructure that shapes humans and society together. If protection is not built today, its cost will be seen tomorrow.