Generation Alpha did not choose to be the first digitally native generation. In an increasingly complex digital ecosystem, this simple truth is an important starting point to what has fast become one of the greatest challenges of our age: protecting children’s mental health online.

If social media is this generation’s smoking, then the creative industries have both an opportunity and responsibility to safeguard young people’s mental health.

For parents it is all too easy to dish out criticisms that they are asleep at the wheel, but the truth is more complex. Arguably organisations with the best of intentions, such as The Smartphone Free Childhood Movement, inadvertently abscond the world’s biggest social media platforms for responsibility for policing their platforms.

The truth is that social media platforms themselves can help solve problems of their own creation. While trusted brands have a crucial role to play in sparking vital conversations between parents and children from everything from online safety to positive body image. In a world of few certainties the singular truth that not only do we not have all the answers, but we aren’t even asking the right questions, is increasingly clear.

With this in mind, we asked leaders if the industry is guilty of ignoring the toxic impact of social media on children’s mental health.

Social media can be a wonderful place. In the sports world, where many Sid Lee London clients exist, it allows fans to connect directly with each other, with their clubs, with their favourite athletes. Never before could a fan have a chance of their comment being seen and responded to by Beckham himself.

But therein lies the problem. The comments section. It’s a humanity-defying wasteland of rudeness (at best) and racism (at worst). And the effect such a wasteland can have on our youth can’t be ignored. Scrolling through such vulgarity when your entire life stage revolves around being a sponge to life can desensitise a generation.

But is that The Industry’s problem? Are we to blame? I don’t think we are. Are we responsible for fixing it? Not in its entirety, but we can find solutions that help. A simple one is policing our contents’ comments section. We can encourage our brands to have integrity and be opinionated on what’s acceptable and what isn’t. The most successful brands in the world are those who aren’t afraid to fight for morality.

We can also put our genius to good use and create more supportive spaces where young people can be positively influenced. Such as Cleat’s Club, a mobile-first platform launched by England captain Harry Kane that gives unprecedented access to top athletes in a safe haven, without the toxicity.

Social media’s rep is on a constant decline, no thanks to its own founder and his broader decisions on “free speech”. But as creatives and industry leaders, we have the power to ensure our corners of it are positive, empowering and safe for the next generation.

As adults, we know how much social can impact us emotionally. So, it makes sense that children, who are still developing, find it even harder to navigate.

I must claim a bias here. I have a 10-year-old son, who isn’t yet on social (or so I hope) and I want to keep it that way as long as possible. But as he gets older, I will need to be realistic and find the line between being overly protective and helping him learn the street smarts to deal with it.

So how do I reconcile this instinctive fear of social media as a parent with my professional life where so much of what I help create lives on these platforms? My answer is this. I know marketing is incredibly influential (I wouldn’t be doing this job if it wasn’t) and it is for that reason I want to work in an industry that is responsible.

I’m not against marketing on social media. I’m all for brands creating rich, cultural experiences that make consumers’ lives better. But I am against marketing that doesn’t prioritise online safety and is laissez-faire on shielding children from its sometimes, detrimental effect.

So, in answer to the question, no I don’t think we, as an industry, are doing enough. I don’t want to have to worry about my son getting access.

I’m not pretending the answers to this are easy. But I do think a collective desire to do the right thing is a good start.

The fact that ‘brain rot’ was the 2024 Oxford Word of the Year speaks volumes about social media’s toxic grip on children’s mental health. Defined as one’s mental deterioration from excessive content consumption, the term has exploded in recent years - not just among doom scrolling teens but brands (looking at you, Nutter Butter) making it their online personality.

Beyond the meme, the reality is pretty bleak. The average 12-year-old spends 29 hours a week glued to their phone. Studies show a strong correlation between social media and rising depression in teens, yet platforms continue to optimise for quick dopamine hits over wellbeing.

Platform leaders announce half-hearted safety measures, then relinquish any accountability for their actions. Influencers glamorise perfect lifestyles as if it’s the norm. And brands continue to cash in on the content that is rotting children’s brains. It’s not just the industry - it’s all of us.

Social media has become a runaway train thanks to the speed at which it has grown and continued to evolve so there are, inevitably, some far from desirable elements in both the content that is put out and the unhealthy amount of time some people spend scrolling.

However, the responsibility for keeping the toxicity at bay lies not only with the platforms but with the content creators, predominantly brands who have the money and brains to use social media for good.

Focusing on creating authentic and real conversations that resonate and inspire people through varied opportunities for open engagement is one way to offer a safe space on social media where brands can be a force for good and allow users to feel the benefits rather than any negative impact.

We’ve recently done some work with global charity Young Futures in this space, talking to teens about the experiences, challenges and opportunities they face in managing tech in a healthy way, and helping them to discover what’s right for them in the current digital climate.

Almost 90% of 18 to 34-year-olds have witnessed or received harmful content online at least once, and at M&C Saatchi, we have been working with some of the most impacted families who have lost children due to online harms, through partnerships with clients like The Archewell Foundation. However, despite the scale of harm, as an industry, we cannot walk away from these platforms. We rely on them more than ever. Meta alone is set to overtake global linear TV in adspend in 2025. It isn’t just that we need them; we’re also excited by them. So much of the work winning at Cannes is social-first, which demonstrates how these platforms can fuel the thing we got into the industry for – to make great creative work.

The trouble is that advertising’s need for eyeballs is a key reason why harmful content isn’t just present, but often boosted via the algorithm.

Agencies cannot tackle this issue alone, and boycotting is little more than a sticking plaster. We need some of the largest advertisers, particularly those with a strong consumer base among parents and young people, to make greater demands of the platforms, and we need agencies to rally behind them, making a virtue of this stance to increase affinity from the parents and young people who buy from them. We must demonstrate that taking a stand isn’t just the right thing to do, but good for business too. 

Sources
90% fact - Alan Turing Institute, 2023
Meta spend fact – Warc Media

We don’t have to look far to see the evidence of social media’s damaging impact on young minds – be that academic studies, the changes to social media usage regulations in Australia, or the well-publicised choices that senior execs at Apple, Meta and TikTok have made to withhold smartphone and social media access for their own children.

In UK schools, self-harm, misogyny and other deeply damaging behaviours are normalised. The Head of Safeguarding at an ‘outstanding’ OFSTED rated school told me that when it comes to pupils' self-harming at school, ‘we have a lot of that going on here, it is normal for girls to do that’. Social media feeds young minds with content around self-harm, suicide ideation, and other harmful behaviours, and fuels the idea that these are normal.

Our industry is certainly guilty of ignoring the toxic impact of social media on children’s mental health . But the question is, perhaps, does it need to give this issue its attention? Social media isn’t illegal, so arguably the industry has no duty other than to make sure any comms it creates don’t break the law. However, we have had a very loud public voice on things like climate change, social inclusion and purpose, and rightly so. Why choose to support these initiatives and keep quiet on the impact that social media is having on the young? Could it be that social platforms are now where adland makes a huge percentage of its profits? For what it’s worth, I think the industry needs to take a long hard look in the mirror.

I wouldn’t say the ad industry is guilty, but I do think it can be a bit blinkered when it comes to how much influence it actually has. Studies show that kids spending too much time on social media tend to get less sleep, feel more down and have lower self-esteem. But it’s not an ad agency problem – it’s the whole social media culture alongside poor regulations and censorship. We’re even seeing more schools ban phones, which shows how big an issue this is becoming.

Having a 10-year-old sister, I see the pressure she feels to keep up with friends, the FOMO (fear of missing out), and how easily she can access grown-up material. Babies today are learning how to swipe on phones before they can even walk! Ads are just one piece of the puzzle, though. Social media itself creates a toxic environment where kids feel like they’re never enough.

That said, the ad industry does play a role here, and brands need to be mindful of how their content affects kids. It’s about making sure they’re not adding fuel to the fire when it comes to unrealistic beauty standards or lifestyle expectations. That conversation has started, but there’s still a long way to go, and we can always do more.

A recent study by Mind reported that 1 in 5 children suffer from a mental health condition, up nearly 30% in four years. The report also found that social media is a ‘significant, negative contributor’ to the mental wellbeing of those +1.5m affected children.

For a young parent working in advertising, these figures are deeply concerning. Reading reports like these triggers a nervous response about what the future will be like when my two boys grow up and spend more time online. But then, I’ll walk into the office next day and continue working on a social led response for a client. There's a clear tension between the two. And I’m sure I’m not alone in feeling that being ‘well intentioned’ rubs up against the reality of our day to day work.

Because the inconvenient truth is that social media is one of the most effective channels for brands to reach younger consumers. We’re paid to advise on how brands use these channels, to create ideas worth talking about. And, in the process, are directly pulling the youth onto social media, to spend more time in platforms, with our work and our campaigns.

The question then becomes, are we doing enough - and could we be doing more? We're seeing some green shoots emerge, particularly from vested interest brands. EE have been working with celebrity ambassadors to promote the brands PhoneSmart License scheme, designed to teach young people about online hate, digital wellbeing, staying safe online. And Channel 4 have hosted #TogetherAgainstHate, an ad break takeover in collaboration with Nationwide, Mars and McCain calling out online trolling. But these examples are too few and far between.

If our industry is going to continue driving more young people online then we need to be part of the solution, rather than conveniently tone deaf to the problem.

What’s needed is direct and empathetic dialogue between the advertising industry, and leading social platforms. Asking what could we do to increase the safety of our kids online. As well as us setting industry wide standards, together, that we then hold each other against, around what is and isn’t acceptable online.

This approach is working in more progressive parts of the world. In Norway, the Nordic Welfare Centre is working with media owners and advertisers to help define better ‘parental controls’ on social, that offer guardians more transparency about where their kids spend time, and what they are exposed to, online.

If our industry wants to make significant change, we need to pursue new standards, new levels of understanding, and new levels of dialogue. Have better, more open and more honest conversations both amongst ourselves, with our clients, and with social media companies, to identify how to set clearer, more transparent and better ‘policed’ safeguards. And ultimately, to be prepared to call out brands and campaigns that don’t adhere to these standards.

Ignoring? No. Underestimating? Perhaps.

Conversations around social media’s impact on young minds are constantly evolving. Early concerns focused on platforms becoming breeding grounds for bullying, leading to work from organisations like The Diana Award’s Anti-Bullying Programme, which as a creator, I had the privilege of running workshops for several years that empowered kids to combat online harassment.

But the issue has grown beyond bullying. Today, young audiences face pressures from algorithm-driven feeds surfacing unrealistic beauty standards for both boys and girls, alongside the influence of unregulated creators. Acknowledging the risks isn’t enough – brands, platforms, and agencies must take action.

At PrettyGreen, we work with brands to ensure influencer content is transparent, age-appropriate, and aligned with best practices like the IMTB and ISBA’s Code of Conduct. We advise on best practices for the CoC, for working with children’s brands, collaborating with kid influencers, and ensuring the space moves in the right direction. Campaigns like our award-winning work with Play-Doh and NERF have proven that creativity and safety can coexist, creating environments where kids can engage with content from carefully vetted role models – as well as sparking creativity in our young audiences, we’re successfully marketing to parents by identifying insights that really relate to what’s important to parents’ day-to-day. Our Play-Doh Restaurant of Imagination campaign was founded from the insight that when kids are engaged with the creation of food, fussiness is reduced and mealtimes are less stressful. We positioned Play-Doh and the new Busy Chef’s Kitchen toy as the secret weapon against picky eaters by engaging kids with ‘food’ and turning mundane mealtimes into magical adventures – using a strategy that empathised and supported.

Regulation will (and should) continue evolving, but self-regulation is just as crucial. We have robust internal frameworks around accountable activation which run through every execution, ensuring we push the industry in the right direction – though there’s always more to be done. That means rigorously vetting influencers, championing positive role models, and advocating for stronger platform protections. It’s not just about reach – it’s about responsibility.

Is the industry guilty? I think the real question is: what are we doing to change the narrative? Because awareness isn’t enough – we need action from all players.