A New Push To Protect Children From Social Media

Social Media Is Failing America’s Children

A New Push for Nationwide Protections

U.S. Senator Katie Britt is spearheading federal legislation that would ban social media for children under 13 and restrict algorithmic content for all users under 17. It’s an aggressive move driven by an unmistakable trend: the more time teens spend on social platforms, the more negative, anxious, and depressed they report feeling.

For parents, educators, healthcare providers, and child-focused organizations, this debate is no longer theoretical. The digital environment kids grow up in has become a measurable public-health issue.

The Heart of Britt’s Argument

Britt cites research — and the real experiences of American families — showing that teens themselves acknowledge the emotional toll of platforms designed to maximize engagement, not well-being.

14- to 17-year-olds repeatedly report:

• Feeling worse after scrolling

• Increased anxiety

• Depressive symptoms

• Social comparison pressure

• Difficulty disengaging from algorithm-driven feeds

Britt’s position is blunt:

“Kids shouldn’t be on social media until they’re 16.”

The Proposed Legislation

Britt’s bill would establish two major nationwide rules:

1. No Social Media for Children Under 13

Platforms would be prohibited from creating accounts for users below the age threshold, closing loopholes that rely on self-reported birthdates.

2. No Algorithmic Targeting for Anyone Under 17

Feeds for teens would be chronological or non-algorithmic, reducing exposure to:

• Addictive engagement loops

• Targeted viral content

• Manipulative recommendation systems

• Extremism, misinformation, and predatory behavior

The bill would dramatically reshape how platforms operate for minors, shifting the online experience from algorithm-controlled to user-controlled.

Why Congress Is Struggling to Act

Despite bipartisan agreement on the harm, past efforts have repeatedly stalled due to:

• Big Tech lobbying pressure

• Disagreements over free speech

• Complexities in defining “algorithmic harm”

• Enforcement challenges

• Industry concerns about liability

Britt argues that delay is unacceptable:

“Big Tech has a grip on Congress. Congress’ inaction is feckless.”

The Broader Mental-Health Crisis

Pediatricians, psychologists, and school leaders nationwide report parallel trends:

• Increased screen time

• Escalating anxiety

• Identity pressure

• Declining attention spans

• Exposure to harmful content

• Sleep disruption

• Cyberbullying and social isolation

This is no longer speculation — it’s a pattern.

Implications for Schools, Healthcare, and Families

If passed, the legislation would require major changes to digital environments:

• Schools would need clearer device policies

• Healthcare providers could incorporate digital-hygiene counseling

• Parents would gain stronger tools for managing screen time

• Platforms would need age verification and safer defaults

• Guardianship-based controls would become standard

For organizations working with children, this debate is now about risk management, not politics.

The Provocative Takeaway

The internet was never built for children — but children live in it.

Sen. Britt’s proposal forces a national conversation we can’t avoid:

Who is responsible for protecting kids when algorithms shape their emotional world?

The time for guardrails has arrived.

70% of all cyber attacks target small businesses, I can help protect yours.

#️⃣ #cybersecurity #childsafety #MSP #socialmedia #techpolicy

Sen. Katie Britt pushes a national ban on social media for children under 13 and algorithm limits for teens. Here’s what the proposal means and why it matters.