Concerns about the impact of social media on individuals’ mental health have intensified in recent years, following incidents such as the suicide of 14-year-old Molly Russell in 2017. Russell took her own life after viewing psychologically damaging material online. However, research into the possible link between social media use and poor mental health has been constrained by strictly limited access to key data.

The government’s 2019 Online Harms white paper laid out a set of proposals to regulate social media companies, including by introducing a small levy on these companies to establish an independent regulator to ensure that online companies fulfil their legal duty of care. Recently, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has confirmed that the plans laid out in the white paper will go ahead, including a two per cent levy on UK revenues of the largest tech companies in spite of threats from the White House against the French government, which is introducing a similar levy.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists report has generally welcomed these proposals, but has also argued that the government should go further.

It has proposed that the ‘turnover tax’ on internet giants should be applied to international revenue rather than just UK revenue; some of the funds raised from this tax could contribute towards mental health research.

The college has also called for the independent online regulator to be tasked with establishing a protocol for anonymised data sharing between social media companies and universities for independent research. This data could include, for instance, the amount of time young people spend on different activities on social media platforms and what content they view, meaning that researchers would not rely on self-reported data.

The report summarised the current state of research into the benefits and harms of social media use, including its educational use; effects on sleep; low mood; self-harm and suicide rates, and eating disorders, raising concerns that vulnerable groups of people (such as children with poor mental health or troubled home lives) may be disproportionately harmed.

The report acknowledges that there has been no systematic evaluation on the impact of excessive screen time on children and that there are many different ways to use devices which have both positive and negative influences on wellbeing.

“There is an urgent need for good-quality longitudinal studies which explore the context and content of technology use beyond just screen-time use, including how technology can be harnessed for its positive benefits in children and young people to improve or maintain wellbeing,” the authors wrote.

“As a psychiatrist working on the front line, I am seeing more and more children self-harming and attempting suicide as a result of their social media use and online discussions,” said Dr Bernadka Dubicka, chair of the child and adolescent faculty at the college and a co-author of the report. “We will never understand the risks and benefits of social media use unless the likes of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram share their data with researchers.

“Their research will help shine a light on how young people are interacting with social media, not just how much time they spend online. Self-regulation is not working. It is time for government to step up and take decisive action to hold social media companies to account for escalating harmful content to vulnerable children and young people.”

Ian Russell, the father of Molly Russell, provided the foreword to the report. He said that “pushing algorithms” were responsible for the death of his daughter, showing her content featuring graphic self-harm and memes encouraging suicide.

“I have no doubt that social media helped kill my daughter,” he wrote.

The NHS national director for mental health Claire Murdoch said: “If these tech giants really want to be a force for good, put a premium on their users wellbeing and take their responsibilities seriously, then they should do all that they can to help researchers better understand how they operate and the risks posed – until then, they cannot confidently say whether the good outweighs the bad.”

A Facebook spokesperson said that the company was already removing harmful content from its platforms, providing support for people who search for it and was working with the government and organisations such as the Samaritans to develop industry guidelines.

A government spokesperson said: “We are developing world-leading plans to make the UK a safer place to be online. This includes a duty of care on online companies, overseen by an independent regulator with tough enforcement powers, to hold them to account. The regulator will have the power to require transparency reports from companies outlining what they are doing to protect people online. These reports will be published so parents and children can make informed decisions about their internet use.”

Concerns about the impact of social media on individuals’ mental health have intensified in recent years, following incidents such as the suicide of 14-year-old Molly Russell in 2017. Russell took her own life after viewing psychologically damaging material online. However, research into the possible link between social media use and poor mental health has been constrained by strictly limited access to key data.

The government’s 2019 Online Harms white paper laid out a set of proposals to regulate social media companies, including by introducing a small levy on these companies to establish an independent regulator to ensure that online companies fulfil their legal duty of care. Recently, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has confirmed that the plans laid out in the white paper will go ahead, including a two per cent levy on UK revenues of the largest tech companies in spite of threats from the White House against the French government, which is introducing a similar levy.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists report has generally welcomed these proposals, but has also argued that the government should go further.

It has proposed that the ‘turnover tax’ on internet giants should be applied to international revenue rather than just UK revenue; some of the funds raised from this tax could contribute towards mental health research.

The college has also called for the independent online regulator to be tasked with establishing a protocol for anonymised data sharing between social media companies and universities for independent research. This data could include, for instance, the amount of time young people spend on different activities on social media platforms and what content they view, meaning that researchers would not rely on self-reported data.

The report summarised the current state of research into the benefits and harms of social media use, including its educational use; effects on sleep; low mood; self-harm and suicide rates, and eating disorders, raising concerns that vulnerable groups of people (such as children with poor mental health or troubled home lives) may be disproportionately harmed.

The report acknowledges that there has been no systematic evaluation on the impact of excessive screen time on children and that there are many different ways to use devices which have both positive and negative influences on wellbeing.

“There is an urgent need for good-quality longitudinal studies which explore the context and content of technology use beyond just screen-time use, including how technology can be harnessed for its positive benefits in children and young people to improve or maintain wellbeing,” the authors wrote.

“As a psychiatrist working on the front line, I am seeing more and more children self-harming and attempting suicide as a result of their social media use and online discussions,” said Dr Bernadka Dubicka, chair of the child and adolescent faculty at the college and a co-author of the report. “We will never understand the risks and benefits of social media use unless the likes of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram share their data with researchers.

“Their research will help shine a light on how young people are interacting with social media, not just how much time they spend online. Self-regulation is not working. It is time for government to step up and take decisive action to hold social media companies to account for escalating harmful content to vulnerable children and young people.”

Ian Russell, the father of Molly Russell, provided the foreword to the report. He said that “pushing algorithms” were responsible for the death of his daughter, showing her content featuring graphic self-harm and memes encouraging suicide.

“I have no doubt that social media helped kill my daughter,” he wrote.

The NHS national director for mental health Claire Murdoch said: “If these tech giants really want to be a force for good, put a premium on their users wellbeing and take their responsibilities seriously, then they should do all that they can to help researchers better understand how they operate and the risks posed – until then, they cannot confidently say whether the good outweighs the bad.”

A Facebook spokesperson said that the company was already removing harmful content from its platforms, providing support for people who search for it and was working with the government and organisations such as the Samaritans to develop industry guidelines.

A government spokesperson said: “We are developing world-leading plans to make the UK a safer place to be online. This includes a duty of care on online companies, overseen by an independent regulator with tough enforcement powers, to hold them to account. The regulator will have the power to require transparency reports from companies outlining what they are doing to protect people online. These reports will be published so parents and children can make informed decisions about their internet use.”