A ban on social media for under-16s in Australia comes into effect on December 10 2025. Young people will see their accounts deactivated, with social media companies responsible for enacting the ban.
In the UK, the government has committed to addressing young people’s use of the internet through the Online Safety Act rather than enforcing an outright ban.
However, children’s use of devices is often limited. Bans on smartphones in schools, as well as parent pledges to delay their children’s smartphone use, have gained widespread traction in the UK. They are based on assumptions including that smartphone use is addictive, distracting and leads to children doing worse in school.
On the other hand, though, research suggests the cause and effect may not be so clearcut. Studies have found that phone banning in schools does not significantly increase academic attainment or improve wellbeing.
We are academics with decades of experience exploring young people’s use of digital media. Our ongoing research suggests that an outright ban on social media platforms for under-16s is problematic. It neglects young people’s rights and voice and penalises them rather than targeting social media platforms.
VH-studio/Shutterstock
Bans could erode trust between young people and the adults in their lives. Children may be put off telling adults about something harmful they’re not supposed to have seen. This could lead to them being less able to access support.
Our ongoing study is exploring the implications of banning smartphones in schools in England. Survey data suggests that most schools in the UK do not allow phones to be used at all during the school day.
Previous research by one of us (Jessica Ringrose) explored young people’s experiences with smartphones and social media at school. This research found that girls were being sent nude images by boys at their schools and were exposed to misogynistic messages originating from the manosphere.
Nevertheless, our ongoing work shows widespread opposition to phone school bans among young people. There’s a generational divide: 75% of young people opposed school phone bans, while most parents (88%) and teachers (87%) supported them.
A problem with strict bans in school settings is that issues and harms young people may encounter online, including those that originate from their classmates, are displaced from school.
One of us (Jessica) has previously carried out research on the challenges of combating digital harms in schools that found schools lacked victim support and young people feared reporting online abuse. “No phone” policies may perpetuate this. Young people may be put off showing teachers something online that upset them when they know they’re not supposed to get out their phone.
For parents, too, phone bans may be a way of pushing away a problem they don’t feel equipped or supported to deal with. Interviews with mothers in the US who had signed pledges to delay giving young people smartphones revealed this uncertainty.
Smartphone avoidance strategies delayed the need to engage in other, more nuanced, forms of parental mediation of digital devices. Simply deferring young people’s use of smartphones may not deal with the doubts and fears that parents feel around their children’s use of technology.
Interviews with parents and carers from our ongoing study show they feel overwhelmed and unsupported when it comes to their children’s smartphone use. “When you’re a busy parent, making sure you’re on top of monitoring what they’re doing seems like quite a hard task,” one mother said. “There’s just not enough guidance,” another commented.
What teens think
Our ongoing work is focused on hearing what young people have to say about phone bans. It suggests that bans make young people feel a loss of autonomy and agency, and that they want guidance from adults on smartphone and social media use.
This need for support is something that research has consistently found that young people want. They want to be able to talk to adults and to be listened to without judgement.
We are not dismissing parents’ or teachers’ concerns, nor their hopes for safer smartphone futures. We are also not suggesting students use phones during lessons when it is not appropriate. Rather we argue that listening to young people’s and families’ views about and hopes for tech is crucial.
Research from the House of Lords shows an urgent need for critical thinking and analytical skills to access, evaluate, create and act on media, for both children and adults. Teachers have pointed to major gaps in media literacy education, especially around social media and AI.
But without addressing this at school, online harms are not reduced. Instead, responsibility for them is shifted onto parents, who already feel ill-equipped to address children’s online lives.
By focusing on media literacy in both policies and the curriculum, schools can address children’s experiences and views. This could include covering issues such as AI and social media business models, algorithms, misinformation, surveillance, privacy and consent in the use of technology.
It’s best if schools and parents are able to work together to address rapidly shifting technology concerns such as AI, instead of shifting responsibility back and forth. Parents and families need support to help children navigate responsible use of social media and issues including AI and consent.
