Within hours of the government announcing a ban on social media for under-16s, many have argued the policy will do little to keep children safer online.
During a press conference at Downing Street this morning (15 June), Keir Starmer announced the government will be implementing a social media ban for children under the age of 16.
‘Social media is making children unhappy, it’s making it easier for bullies to harass and abuse them, and it could even be harming their mental health,’ the prime minister said.
The plan, which has been in talks since the beginning of this year, means children will be prevented from downloading snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X (formally known as Twitter). Under-18s will also be stopped from using romantic chatbots designed to simulate sexual relationships.
Starmer added: ‘This is not something I do lightly, and I will not present it as cost-free, as if social media has [brought no] benefits to young people, because clearly that is wrong. But government is always about choices, and it’s clear to me that a total ban is the right choice.’
However, dozens of people and organisations – including leading technology firms – disagree. A spokesperson for Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, said: ‘As we’ve seen in Australia, bans risk isolating teens from online communities and information, and driving them to unregulated alternatives that lack built-in protections and parental controls.’
On the subject of feeling isolated, a few people have taken to Reddit to express how the ban could be detrimental to children’s mental health. User lethalsaber said: ‘I wouldn’t have made it to sixteen without my online community. Being a teenager was already hard enough, but being a queer teen without the words to describe it was extremely hard.’
In similar vein, TheDarkConclusion remarked: ‘Having no online communities is going to be devastating for many kids, especially those who are already marginalised one way or another. As long as the powers that be put out the carpet for Digital ID, I guess they don’t care for the damages along the way.’
Questions also remain over how effectively the ban can be enforced. Six months ago, Australia became the first country to introduce a social media ban, but early evidence suggests the policy’s impact has been limited.
Starmer dismissed suggestions that British teenagers would similarly find ways around the rules, arguing such concerns miss the point of the policy altogether. He claimed: ‘We don’t say: ‘Oh look, a teenager managed to get a drink somehow, so let’s not bother banning alcohol sales for children.’ We don’t do that, do we?
‘I just don’t accept that. Our laws are rules, but they’re also an expression of our values. They shape the social contract, and so this will change the conversations that parents have, and the expectations of children over time.
‘It will make a huge difference. It will make our children safer. It will make our children happier. It will give them more time, more security, full freedom to grow up, more opportunity, and that, at the end of the day, is what this government is about.’
Esther Ghey, the mother of murdered teenager Brianna Ghey, said she welcomed the ban, saying it would ‘potentially save so many children’s lives’.
Despite this, Andy Bell, chief executive of Centre for Mental Health and Efua Poku-Amanfo, head of The Children and Young People Mental Health Coalition, said: ‘Instituting a ban on under-16s from some social media platforms is not an effective or sufficient response to a serious public health issue.
‘There is clear evidence of the risks that social media platforms can pose to children and young people’s mental health. These risks come from the content itself, the algorithms that impact what children and young people see, and features that may cause addictive and risk-taking behaviour.’
‘We are concerned that a ban will give a false sense of safety to families, leaving loopholes for more dangerous, unregulated platforms to exploit under 16s,’ they continued. ‘Young people are clear that an age-based ban will not work and will not be enough.’
The government have said the ban could be inflicted as early as spring 2027.
Image: Aman Pal/UnSplash
In related news:
Are we logging off too early? Researchers question social media bans
‘There is no justice for women’: a story of domestic abuse and systemic failure
Leave a Reply