The UK announced last week that they are joining Australia in imposing a social media ban for children under 16 years old. The ban, which will go into effect on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, will also impose stronger age verification requirements for all.

This announcement comes at a time when mental health and social media use have become inexorably linked in public discourse. Earlier this year, in a landmark legal case, Meta and YouTube were found liable for causing childhood social media addiction. The winning argument in court positioned the harmful mental health symptoms faced by one woman as a direct outcome of the way social media feeds are designed. In particular, the social media companies were accused of building app features that were purposefully addictive. While scholars still disagree about the exact ways that social media impacts mental health, the Los Angeles jury was ready to declare there was evidence that the companies had caused harm.

The scientifically contested fear that social media platforms are adversely affecting youth mental health is leading governments down the path of imposing bans and conducting additional surveillance of citizens.

But could there be alternatives to a total ban? It’s easy to punish what doesn’t work; it’s harder to provide alternatives that do. We’ve come to expect social media to look a........

© Psychology Today