Countries including France and Britain are considering following Australia’s lead by banning children and some teenagers from using social media, but experts remain divided over whether such a move would actually improve young people’s mental health.
Supporters argue that urgent action is needed to address deteriorating mental health among adolescents, while critics say the scientific evidence is mixed and favour a more nuanced regulatory approach.
Australia last month became the first country to ban under-16s from major social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and YouTube. France is now debating similar legislation for under-15s, including a proposal backed by President Emmanuel Macron.
In Britain, the Guardian reported that American psychologist Jonathan Haidt — a supporter of the Australian ban — had been invited to brief UK government officials. In his 2024 bestseller The Anxious Generation, Haidt claimed excessive screen time, particularly on social media, was rewiring children’s brains and fuelling a mental health crisis.
While influential among policymakers, the book has sparked controversy among academics. Canadian psychologist Candice Odgers said in a review that Haidt’s claims were “not supported by science”.
Researchers remain split over how much harm social media actually causes. Michael Noetel of the University of Queensland told AFP that even “small effects across billions of users add up”, adding that there is “plenty of evidence” linking social media to harm among teens. He said Haidt was “more right than his harshest critics admit, and less right than his book implies”, calling a ban “a bet worth making”.
France’s public health watchdog ANSES last week ruled that social media has numerous harmful effects on adolescents — particularly girls — although it is not the sole cause of declining mental health.
Studies paint a complex picture. Research led by Noetel reviewing more than 100 studies found that excessive screen time is linked to psychological distress, which in turn drives even more screen use. But another large Australian study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that teens who used social media moderately fared better than those who used it heavily or not at all.
“The findings suggest that both excessive restriction and excessive use can be problematic,” said researcher Ben Singh, noting that girls were most affected by heavy use, while complete deprivation harmed older teenage boys the most.
French psychiatrist Serge Tisseron called social media “appallingly toxic” but warned that a blanket ban could be easily bypassed by tech-savvy teens and might let parents off the hook. He urged more balanced regulation.
Others suggest waiting to see the impact of Australia’s experiment. “Within a year, we should know much more about how effective the Australian social media ban has been,” said Cambridge University researcher Amy Orben.
Australia’s online safety watchdog said last week that tech companies have already blocked 4.7 million accounts belonging to under-16s, as the world watches closely to see whether the ban delivers real benefits.
