Australia Just Banned Teen Social Media — But Are We Fixing the Wrong Problem?
They do things differently down under. This week Australia embarked on a rather novel social experiment which involves banning social media sites for users under the age of 16. Predictably the announcement attracted equal measures of criticism, with some arguing the policy does not go far enough, while others have raised concerns about freedom of speech. Two teenagers have even taken a case to the Australian High Court claiming the restrictions infringe their political freedoms.
Before debating whether the ban is appropriate it is worth returning to the legislation’s stated objectives. The primary driver appears to be a desire to protect young people’s mental health and wellbeing. This is entirely laudable, but to justify such intervention policymakers should be confident not only of a correlation between declining mental health and social media use but of causation.
So what does the evidence suggest?
A number of long term studies highlight a strong correlation between the arrival of smartphones in the late 2000s and early 2010s followed shortly afterwards by social media platforms and a marked rise in indicators of psychological distress. In the United States suicide rates among 10 to 24 year olds increased by 57% between 2007 and 2017 according to a study by MIT. In Australia cases of self harm among females aged 15 to 19 nearly doubled over the same period according to the their Institute of Health and Welfare. Schools have also reported rising levels of depression, anxiety, self harm and general psychological distress across this timeframe.
At first glance the evidence appears compelling.
However, another long-term trend may also be influencing this shift. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt explains in his book The Anxious Generation that parenting styles have changed since the 1980s. During that time, free play for children started to decrease, and this decline became more pronounced through the 1990s. Now, it's uncommon to see kids playing outside without supervision, parks are often empty on weekends, and most parents no longer send children to the shops for a pint of milk. Meanwhile, activities like watching television and playing computer games have taken the place of outdoor play. As a result, children have been swapping outdoor group activities for indoor, solitary forms of entertainment. And, this trend has been turbo charged in the past 15 years with smart phones and ever more captivating algorithms.
This however is only one stage in a broader change that began long before smartphones existed. In his book, Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam charts the post war erosion of social capital using the metaphor of bowling. Although overall bowling numbers rose participation in leagues and community clubs collapsed. Putnam attributes this to several factors and one of the most significant is the privatising effect of television. Before television families and neighbours spent more time together, talking, playing and debating. Children roamed more freely because parents trusted in the strength of the local community.
Why does this matter for children today?
It matters because children are wired to seek social interaction as part of their development. Playing independently teaches them to tolerate uncertainty and cope when adults are not present to solve problems. Mixing within a community teaches emotional regulation. You learn to manage your behaviour because you must live with the consequences among people you will see repeatedly. Risk is understood best by doing, by trying, failing and adjusting. Every hour spent watching television, playing Roblox or scrolling Instagram is an hour not spent developing these vital humanistic skills. Over time this erosion leads to young people who are less resilient and more vulnerable to online harms and who are less equipped to judge behaviour or navigate difficult interactions.
Returning to Australia’s ban we may be in the right ballpark, but I am sceptical it will achieve the transformational effect some hope for. The government is contending with decades long societal changes in childhood itself. Social media may have poured petrol on the bonfire, but the underlying embers were already smouldering.
If it were enforceable, a ban on smartphones altogether for under 16s might shift the dial further. Even that would need to form part of a broader strategy which includes compulsory outdoor education, greater investment in youth clubs and community groups and a public campaign to help parents understand risk and development more clearly.
For now Australia’s experiment is worth watching closely as it may reveal useful lessons for all of us as we confront what is undoubtedly a profound and long term challenge.
