Age bans look decisive but risk weakening better regulation

AI Summary

The article cautions that banning social media for under-16s may distract from addressing platform design features linked to young people’s distress. It points to Australia’s early experience and the UK Online Safety Act, which imposes duties on platforms and gives enforcement powers to a regulator.

Banning social media for under 16s sounds like the right thing to do. It gives the impression that someone is finally taking the problem seriously, especially when so many of us in clinics are seeing more anxiety, sleep issues, and distress connected to constant online life.1But early results from Australia suggest that we should be careful about making age bans the main solution.2 Continued social media use by so many adolescents is only part of the picture. The policy never tackled how these platforms are designed. Once the age rule was in place, attention shifted to how age was checked and whether companies had complied. The things that shape young people’s experience—endless scrolling, algorithms that push upsetting content, and systems built to keep them hooked—were mostly left alone.3The UK’s Online Safety Act 2023 offers a more direct response, putting a duty of care on platforms and giving the regulator powers...