Web Exclusive

From a Social Work Standpoint, Social Media Was a Mistake
By Gary Norman, LCSW, LICSW, BA, MSW

Social media was never just a collection of apps—it was an experiment on the human psyche, rolled out at scale before we understood the brain we were testing. What looks, in hindsight, like the inevitable evolution of communication has a darker logic: platforms were designed to hijack our attention, amplify social comparison, and monetize emotion. Psychologically, that combination was a mistake—especially for adolescents, whose regulatory systems and social identities are still under construction.

From a social work perspective, the rollout of social media without safeguards reflects a systemic failure to consider human development, environmental stressors, and structural vulnerabilities. Ecological systems theory reminds us that youth don’t exist in isolation; they are shaped by the digital environments they inhabit.1 When those environments are engineered for addiction rather than well-being, the result is an imbalance that reverberates across family systems, schools, and communities.

Human beings evolved to pay attention to what other members of our group think and feel. Reputation, status, and belonging mattered for survival. Social media weaponized that ancient circuitry. Infinite scrolls, variable rewards (likes, comments), and engineered feedback loops convert social signals into dopamine punctuations. For adults, these patterns are troubling; for teens, they’re formative. Adolescence is a sensitive window when peer feedback strongly shapes self-concept and when sleep, in-person play, and unstructured time—all protective against depression—are most easily displaced. That combination creates fertile ground for harm.

The empirical record is sobering. Several large studies and systematic reviews show consistent associations between heavier social-media or screen use and worse mental-health outcomes in adolescents. A JAMA Psychiatry analysis found that teens spending more than three hours per day on social media are at heightened risk for internalizing problems, including depressive symptoms.2 A within-person study in JAMA Pediatrics noted that increases in screen time predicted increases in depressive symptoms over time.3

Meta-analyses confirm the pattern: greater exposure correlates with higher rates of depression and anxiety through social comparison, cyberbullying, sleep disruption, and displacement of face-to-face interactions.4 Jean Twenge and colleagues observed that heavy social-media users show substantially higher rates of depressive symptoms than light or nonusers, coinciding with the rise of smartphones and social platforms.5

We should be careful: association is not causation, and not every teen becomes depressed. Yet causality is plausible. Social media magnifies comparison, fragments attention, erodes sleep, and cultivates a contingent sense of self dependent on likes and metrics. For developing brains, repeated exposure to algorithmically amplified evaluation can normalize anxiety and hypervigilance.

From a clinical social work standpoint, these trends reflect a broader erosion of protective factors. Healthy development requires belonging, attunement, supportive adults, and environments reinforcing intrinsic worth. Social work research identifies connectedness, caregiver presence, and consistent routines as key buffers against depression and anxiety.6,7 But social media often replaces these with performative belonging and unpredictable reinforcement patterns.

Interventions must therefore strengthen the microsystems around youth—families, schools, and peer groups—while advocating for structural changes at the macrosystem level. Public health agencies now identify social media as a substantial contributor to youth mental-health challenges and call for research, design reform, and better parental and school-based supports.8

Beyond the individual and family levels, a social work lens requires us to examine the structural economic forces fueling this crisis. Social media platforms emerged within a market defined by data extraction and attention monetization. From a macro-practice standpoint, this reflects what social work scholars warn about: when profit supersedes human well-being, vulnerable populations pay the price.9 Adolescents became inadvertent test subjects in a global behavioral experiment—one resembling past public-health battles with tobacco, fast food, and gambling.

Social workers must also confront disparities. Youth from marginalized communities experience higher rates of cyberbullying, targeted harassment, and algorithmic discrimination.6 BIPOC youth, LGBTQ+ youth, and low-income adolescents face disproportionate exposure to harmful content and fewer algorithmic protections, deepening existing inequities in mental health, school discipline, and family stability.

Community-level interventions provide meaningful solutions. Schools, libraries, and youth programs can create “safe digital communities” grounded in empowerment, mutual aid, and relational safety. Peer-led groups can help teens reflect on digital stress, body image, and the pressures of constant visibility.

Clinically, social workers can integrate digital-use assessments into biopsychosocial evaluations, examining sleep disruption, compulsive use, online conflict, and emotional triggers. Interventions might include CBT to address comparison-driven distortions, motivational interviewing to build insight around compulsive patterns, and family systems work to create collaborative device boundaries.

Regulation must also evolve. Platforms should be required to reduce infinite-scroll features, restrict variable reward structures for minors, and give families more control over algorithmic exposure. The NASW Code of Ethics compels social workers to challenge unjust systems and protect vulnerable populations—and the digital landscape is now one of the most consequential systems shaping youth mental health.10

If we fail to act, we will continue exporting our youngest people’s most vulnerable years into an attention economy designed to keep them online. Psychology taught us what to watch for—and social work teaches us how systems must respond. The experiment should end; thoughtful, precautionary redesign must begin.

— Gary Norman, LCSW, LICSW, BA, MSW, is a psychotherapist and behavioral health consultant.

References
1. Bronfenbrenner U. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Harvard University Press; 1979.

2. Riehm KE, Feder KA, Tormohlen KN, et al. Associations between time spent using social media and internalizing and externalizing problems among US youth. JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76(12):1266-1273.

3. Boers E, Afzali MH, Newton N, Conrod P. Association of screen time and depression in adolescence. JAMA Pediatr. 2019;173(9):853-859.

4. Vidal C, Lhaksampa T, Miller L, Platt R. Social media use and depression in adolescents: a scoping review. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2020;32(3):235-253.

5. Twenge JM, Joiner TE, Rogers ML, Martin GN. Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clin Psychol Sci. 2017;6(1):3-17.

6. Garbarino J. Children and Families in the Social Environment. Routledge; 2017.

7. Saleebey D. The Strengths Perspective in Social Work Practice. 6th ed. Pearson; 2013.

8. Office of the Surgeon General. Social Media and Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2023.

9. Germain CB, Gitterman A. The Life Model of Social Work Practice. Columbia University Press; 1980.

10. NASW. NASW Code of Ethics. National Association of Social Workers; 2021.