GOVERNMENTS seeking to protect children and teenagers through social media bans may be overlooking deeper issues involving platform design, online safety and digital literacy, according to recent reports from the US Surgeon General and Unicef.
The debate has intensified as countries adopt or consider age-based restrictions on social media use. Australia became the first country to implement a nationwide social media ban for children under 16 in late 2024, while Norway, Malaysia and policymakers in Europe have explored similar measures.
The push for restrictions comes amid growing concern over the effects of social media on young people’s mental health. The 2023 US Surgeon General’s Advisory reported that up to 95 percent of adolescents ages 13 to 17 use at least one social media platform, with more than one-third saying they use social media “almost constantly.”
The advisory cited research showing that adolescents who spend more than three hours a day on social media face “double the risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes including symptoms of depression and anxiety.”
At the same time, the report cautioned that evidence remains incomplete.
“Nearly every teenager in America uses social media, and yet we do not have enough evidence to conclude that it is sufficiently safe for them,” the advisory said, adding that “our children have become unknowing participants in a decades-long experiment.”
A separate report released in February 2026 by the Unicef Adolescent Mental Health Hub and the MHPSS Collaborative brought together young people, researchers, policymakers, practitioners and advocates to examine whether social media bans are an effective response to concerns about adolescent well-being.
The dialogue identified four major areas of concern: balancing protection and access, acting despite incomplete evidence, ensuring young people have a voice in policymaking, and addressing unintended consequences of restrictions.
Participants argued that blanket bans may not address the underlying causes of online harm and could instead drive young users to less regulated online spaces.
“Hard bans are unlikely to work,” the report said, noting that young people are already deeply embedded in digital platforms for communication, information and social interaction.
The report also highlighted concerns that restrictions could disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.
“For LGBTQ+ youth, young people with disabilities, and those in geographic isolation, digital spaces are not leisure. They are infrastructure,” the report said. “Removing access removes lifelines for some while ostensibly protecting others.”
Another issue raised by both reports is the lack of independent access to platform data. The Unicef dialogue noted that researchers often depend on limited information because technology companies control much of the data needed to assess how platforms affect young people. Without broader access, researchers may struggle to identify which groups are most vulnerable or determine whether interventions are effective.
Participants also criticized the limited involvement of young people in policy discussions surrounding social media regulation.
“Children’s perspectives are still largely missing from policy discussions,” the report said. “Young people are not just users. They are stakeholders who should be equipped with the skills to articulate their experiences and contribute meaningfully to decisions that affect them.”
Rather than relying solely on age-based bans, the reports pointed to a range of alternatives, including stronger platform accountability, age-appropriate design requirements, algorithmic transparency, digital literacy education, parental support programs and greater youth participation in policymaking.
The Unicef report concluded that policymakers should focus not only on whether children can access social media but also on the systems that shape their online experiences.
“The question isn’t whether to ban. It’s how to address the structural conditions that make platforms harmful in the first place,” the report said.
