All Bans, No Evidence — The Global Paradox of Youth Social Media Prohibition
Youth social media bans are spreading from Australia to the UK, France, and Norway, yet mounting evidence suggests they may be delivering far less than promised. Australia, the first country to legally prohibit under-16s from social media, has seen a parental survey by the eSafety Commissioner — covering 898 parents of children aged 8 to 15 — find that around seven in ten parents whose child had an account before the ban still reported active accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok months later. Zero fines have been issued against the current maximum of AUD 49.5 million, and Prime Minister Albanese's announcement in June 2026 of a doubling to AUD 99 million has not changed that enforcement record. France passed a ban for under-15s only to have the Conseil constitutionnel strike down the core provision through Decision n° 2026-911 DC, ruling a blanket prohibition unconstitutional for violating freedom of expression and communication without proportionality. A May 2026 Frontiers in Developmental Psychology meta-analysis found that not a single social media restriction experiment has ever included anyone under sixteen, meaning every such ban is being enacted without direct experimental evidence for the specific age group targeted. The UK (targeting spring 2027) and Norway (planning to table its bill by the end of 2026) are pressing ahead regardless, while this analysis argues the global ban wave represents political narrative overriding scientific evidence, and that platform design reform — rather than outright access prohibition — is the more defensible and durable path to protecting young people online.