Netflix's ‘Adolescence’ and the cost of profits: Why kids online are not okay

Subscribe to enjoy similar stories. If hard proof were needed of the digital dominance of Indian eyeballs, then the latest Ficci-EY report on media and entertainment supplied it. In 2024, it says, digital media finally displaced TV as the top revenue-generator of this industry, notching up ₹80,200 crore, almost a third of its overall pie.

As estimated, over 40% of the time spent on phones in India is on social media platforms. Anecdotal evidence would suggest individuals aged under 18 are glued even harder to hand-held devices. This, in itself, does not shock parents of teenagers.

What has left many of them stunned lately, however, is the plausibility of a takeover that their first instinct is to deny: that their kids are being raised not by them, but by unseen forces online. The messenger, already shot, is now a must-watch: Adolescence. This four-part Netflix series, drawn from real cases, is about a 13-year-old boy accused of killing his female classmate.

It’s an extreme case, of course, but as the story unfolds, it confronts viewers with the disturbing depths to which teen influences may have sunk. From a coded emoji labelling someone an ‘incel’ to outright misogyny arising from toxic masculinity, the series has a visceral impact. The triumph of its narrative, brought out in the final episode, lies in the big questions it raises.

To what extent are parents responsible for the acts of their children? Are algorithms shaping their values and attitudes? If so, what can we do about it? The idea that teenagers can be kept off the internet is way too wishful. Age-gating, as Australia is trying with a law banning children under 16 from using social media, is unlikely to work. While such measures expect platforms to bar