A majority of US adults now support banning social media for anyone under 16, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. The finding puts American public opinion roughly in line with countries that have already acted on the idea, including Australia, which has enforced a ban, and the UK, which is currently considering one.
Support holds steady across party lines and age groups
Pew surveyed 9,750 US adults between May 26 and June 1, 2026, and found that 56 percent of respondents supported a ban on social media use for anyone under 16. Only 21 percent opposed it, and 23 percent said they were unsure.
Both Republicans and Democrats favored a ban by similar margins, and support stayed above 50 percent in every age bracket. Adults aged 30 to 49 were the most likely to back a ban, alongside parents with children under 18. Those without kids in that age range also favored a ban, though not as strongly.
Smaller guardrails polled higher than an outright ban
The survey also found that support was higher for restrictions than for an outright ban. Around 85 percent of adults favored requiring parental consent before a minor could open a social media account, up from 81 percent when Pew last asked in 2023.
Age verification and daily time limits for minors both polled in the high 70s, with support for age verification rising from 71 percent to 78 percent over the same period. However, that support wasn’t even across age groups. Adults under 30 backed age verification at a lower rate than older adults, around two in three compared to roughly eight in ten among people 30 and older.
Whether a ban is enough to curb social media use among children under 16 remains an open question. Australia’s under-16 ban has faced enforcement problems since it took effect, with testing showing many teens still find ways around the restrictions. In the US, no federal ban exists so far, though a handful of states, including California, have proposed similar legislation. With public support this strong, it’s likely just a matter of time before US lawmakers put it to the test.
Staff who use AI can end up with more to do, not less.
Think carefully about the tools you’re using and why.
Adopt a set of standards and refine your outputs.
The promise of productivity boosts from AI can come with an unwelcome side order of stress. Harvard Business Review found that AI doesn’t reduce work; it intensifies it, leading to cognitive fatigue and unsustainable hours.
While the common perception is that AI can help reduce workloads, allowing employees to focus more on higher-value and more engaging tasks, HBR’s research found that staff using AI worked more quickly and often ended up with more to do, not less.
Ankur Anand, group CIO at tech recruiter Harvey Nash, said professionals who want to avoid cognitive fatigue must understand how to use AI effectively and its potential risks.
“That focus will help to reduce the noise around the workload that AI creates,” he told ZDNET, suggesting that many people have unrealistic expectations about the productivity boost that AI will provide.
“Many organizations are telling their people, ‘We want to understand how you’re making an impact with AI,'” he said. “But these professionals are not empowered, which means that using AI adds a lot of pressure, because they need to prove themselves on their own terms.”
If you’re going to make the most of AI at work, then you’re going to have to find an effective balance between completing tasks quickly and producing high-quality work.
Here’s how the experts believe professionals can ensure they reap the benefits, not the problems, of AI — and they suggest that you’ll need to focus on three core areas: tools, guidelines, and outputs.
Limit your toolset
Alex Read, senior enterprise product manager for data at energy provider EDF UK, told ZDNET that the best way for professionals to reap the benefits, not the challenges, of AI is to be uber-focused on tools that help you produce value in your roles.
While there are thousands of potential AI-enabled services on the market, Read said sensible professionals limit their horizons.
In his own role, for example, Read focuses on how AI can help him build a data platform and update information accurately, efficiently, and productively: “Anything outside of that scope is noise for me.”
That sentiment resonated with Nick Pearson, CIO at technology specialist Ricoh Europe, who told ZDNET it’s important to take a step back and think carefully about how an AI tool can help you produce value in your role.
“If you think about the phrase ‘gen AI,’ the tech is very good, by definition, at generating outputs,” he said. “I could go to bed in the evening, set the model to work, and we could have four new IT strategies produced overnight.”
However, quantity doesn’t necessarily mean quality. Pearson suggested it’s important to focus on AI’s blind spots, particularly as most models are trained on preexisting content.
“AI can’t inspire people, per se; it can’t naturally create something new, because it’s actually quite recursive,” he said.
“And the judgment you have to put in sometimes, on top of everything else, whether it be an ethical or a capability judgment, is not there automatically in the technology.”
It’s in this gap, said Pearson, that human experts play a critical role: “We’re toying with that concern as an organization and saying, ‘Where does AI really play an important role, versus where are we upskilling people in areas that AI probably won’t play for a long time?'”
To correct this issue, HBR said companies need to adopt an “AI practice,” or a set of norms and standards around AI use that help professionals ensure they use AI in a constrained but productive manner.
At EDF UK, Read is part of an internal AI Center of Excellence in enterprise IT, which enables policy for the effective use of AI across the wider organization.
In addition to Read, who contributes input from a data-use perspective, the group includes other tech representatives, such as the firm’s senior manager of AI, principal software engineer, and principal solution architect.
“The remit of this center is to make sure that, when the federated business units are looking to build, develop, and deploy AI services, they have platforms, guidance, best practices, architectural assets, and materials to guide them on how to safely and efficiently adopt AI and operationalize it at scale,” he said.
Some of the key themes the center considers when assessing AI tools are scalability and reusability, ensuring a proposed service doesn’t replicate one already in use.
“All new tools and services related to AI will go through that hopper and funnel to understand scope and ensure the security, regulatory, and ethical side of things are understood,” he said, suggesting that all professionals should use their organization’s pre-existing guidelines to foster an appropriate exploitation of emerging tech.
“The benefit that guided approach brings is that it allows us to be clear in our messaging around what AI services can be used, how they’re used from a use-case perspective, and ultimately, what personas are allowed to use them.”
Louise Newbury-Smith, head of UK&I at technology specialist Zoom, told ZDNET that one way to ensure your outputs are constrained is to focus on prompting.
“Use simple amendments to be specific, such as ‘Give me the top three things with the biggest impact.’ That approach should guide your prompt, rather than saying, ‘Give me everything you know about this topic.'”
Newbury-Smith said the successful use of AI is all about being smart about how it’s exploited, and that effectiveness comes down to enablement and engagement. If a prompt yields too much information, refine it until you get what you need. She said this should still be faster than trying to get answers without AI.
The basic message for professionals is that effective applications of AI are all about you staying in the loop, said Bernhard Seiser, vice president of digital, data, and IT at AOP Health.
Think before you use AI, and think again before you push your outputs around the organization.
“It doesn’t help the business if you get AI-generated emails that are many pages long, and then you need ChatGPT to summarize the text,” he told ZDNET.
Seiser said that while there are certain tasks generative AI is good at and worth using for, in the end, “you need to use your brain.”
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.