7 ms·
UK set to announce social media ban for under-16s
- throwrioawfo 4mo agoGood
- Retr0id 4mo agoAbstractly perhaps, but I'm not aware of any practical enforcement mechanism I'd classify as "good".
- 100ms 4mo agoIt doesn't need to be perfect, but in spite of that perfect is possible if people ask for it. Don't tempt them. Look at what happened in Spain with Cloudflare.
- throwawayffffas 4mo agoIf the operators are liable, they will find a way, it's easy for the operators to infer a users age based on usage patterns. They must be required to close these accounts.
- Schmerika 4mo agoAre you saying that with the awareness that this will be used to remove privacy from social media?
- ck2 4mo agoit's illegal for kids to vape too right? how's that working out? (answer: https://ash.org.uk/resources/view/use-of-e-cigarettes-among-young-people-in-great-britain https://ash.org.uk/resources/view/use-of-e-cigarettes-among-... )
- izzydata 4mo agoBetter than if it weren't illegal I'm sure. Also I think it is that it is illegal to sell kids vapes. It's not illegal for the kids to vape.
- ElProlactin 4mo agoSo just do nothing, right?
- tokai 4mo agoVaping prevalence among youth in UK has plateaued since 2022. So its slowly working. Edit: as your own source conclude
- camgunz 4mo agoThe actual ban passed a couple months ago, after the data in your link was collected. But also, smoking bans (etc) had hugely positive effects on smoking rates. There's every reason to be positive.
- christoph 4mo agoSame as whenever they talk about banning anything in society… They can’t keep drugs, weapons, phones, etc. out of prisons, which are entirely under government purview. Elect clowns, expect a circus.
- calgoo 4mo agoand what does that have to do with anything apart from diluting the point we have against the corrupt assholes.
- calgoo 4mo agoWow looking at your history, please chill. You are very clearly related to the powers at be, i guess you feel unsafe unless uncle sam tucks you in at night. I feel sorry for you at this point...
- mPogrzeb 4mo agoCry me a river. At least someone is trying
- xhkkffbf 4mo agoI agree that there are issues, but won't kids find other places to congregate? Maybe in educational sites?
- testing22321 4mo agoYes. Hopefully outside, in the park playing with a ball or running around.
- nly 4mo agoPerhaps using anonymous registration-free platforms like Session
- fyredge 4mo agoIsn't that better? For one, they're connected to peers they have physically met. Additionally, they won't be exposed to strangers or ads that warp their world view. I still believe that the government should ban unsolicited algorithmic content (so search engines are exempted), but this is a second best option.
- beefmumbai 4mo ago[flagged]
- nly 4mo agoAlternative title: ID verification to be required for all UK citizens to use social media
- jonplackett 4mo agoWell I needed a good reason to quit social media. This can be it.
- stavros 4mo agoHe posted, on a social media website.
- drnick1 4mo agoHN is not "social media," in a conventional sense, far from it. For one, it is completely anonymous, at least if you want it to be.
- davb 4mo agoBut under Ofcom rules, it is social media if we are to assume that they’ll apply the same scoping as the Online Safety Act does for user-to-user services. I think a lot of comments here assume that only sites like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X would be in scope, but I see no reason why they wouldn’t use the same definitions from the OSA (essentially any site where user-to-user communication and content posting takes place, including forums and aggregators).
- Natfan 4mo agohn is a user-to-user service
- pyb 4mo agoIf Reddit is "social media", so is HN.
- demorro 4mo agoWhich was not contradictory, as they were saying they wanted to quit. I also want to quit all social media, including hackernews, in the same way I want to quit eating Mcdonalds and getting high all the time.
- gslepak 4mo agoAnother headline about the Digital ID prison system they're building to identify and restrict all access to the Internet for people of all ages. Then perhaps comes the mark which is about restricting and controlling what you're allowed to buy and sell.
- calgoo 4mo agoOR we can try to move this to the positive side instead of fighting the fascists. We dont NEED social media, its a cancer on humanity. So maybe instead accept this BS and move it towards a place that we can all agree upon. I understand the UK political system is corrupt to its core, like all world goverments, but that's not the reason why to ignore and give in to what the government is demanding.
- like_any_other 4mo agoThere will still be social media. Most of the public conversation will still take place there. You just won't be able to use it anonymously (possibly not even read it).
- calgoo 4mo agoAlso, stop your BS about a prison system, its not whats going on globally. You are just buying into the BS that Facebook and company are sending you. Good on you for buying into their propaganda. The world existed before social media and it will keep existing.
- spacedoutman 4mo agoDidn't work in Australia, won't work in the UK. Parents will just scan the kids in.
- yladiz 4mo agoCan you provide some evidence that it didn’t work in Australia? Given the ban hasn’t been in place that long I’d like to see your sources about it not working.
- sunaookami 4mo agoNTA but it's literally in the article.
- epihelix 4mo agohttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/mar/31/meta-tiktok-snapchat-google-under-investigation-australia-social-media-ban https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/mar/31/meta-... Limited success might be a better term. But if a supposedly blanket ban only stopped 30% of under-16s accounts from accessing social media, that does seem pretty failure-esque.
- asib 4mo agoThis is a story about non-compliance. One hopes the Aus government is going to take some sort of enforcement action. If _that_ fails, then you could claim limited success or failure. Presumably you wouldn't call laws against murder a failure because there are murders.
- iamnothere 4mo agoUS prohibition was a failure. Mass noncompliance. Alcohol was and is popular! Many ordinary people hated the laws. Murder is not popular. Murderers are thankfully rare, and they don’t comply with the laws on murder. The masses do. When you make popular things illegal, you erode respect for the law and turn people against the government. You can (maybe) get away with this when times are good, but when times are not good you are doubling your problems. There is a spillover into other kinds of criminality as law-abiding people decide that the law may not matter as much as it once did. Ignore this at your own peril.
- Fervicus 4mo agoArguing about whether this is good or effective for kids or not is irrelevant. This isn't about kids at all. It's about surveillance.
- paytonjjones 4mo agoRegardless of the underlying motives and surveillance outcomes, it will surely affect the kids too. So it's worth discussing.
- undersuit 4mo agoNo one is saying we should not discuss it, but discussing it in the context of the kids is a red herring. It will affect everyone.
- philipallstar 4mo agoThis is obviously about kids. The problem is it requires surveillance. You don't get to decide what it's not about.
- arcza 4mo agoand why do you get to decide what it "is about"?
- philipallstar 4mo agoI didn't say people couldn't decide what it's about.
- cedws 4mo agoThe way this has been pushed through after countless attempts over the past decade, and push back from advising experts, does not feel like it originates from genuine concern for children. It feels like a state trying to wrestle for digital control amidst rising civil unrest.
- childofhedgehog 4mo ago
- paytonjjones 4mo agoThe evidence of social media causing depression and anxiety in youth is mixed and almost all of the affirmative findings are correlational, so I expect to see a variety of takes in this comment thread. Personally, the strongest positive evidence I've seen comes from the natural experiments tracking when high speed internet & phones were introduced geographically. Rates of teen depression do seem to topple in very close sync with this, as discussed here: https://www.afterbabel.com/p/phone-based-childhood-cause-epidemic https://www.afterbabel.com/p/phone-based-childhood-cause-epi...
- functionmouse 4mo agohave a short cartoon about the U.K. banning everything https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUep-4v_M9k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUep-4v_M9k
- atollk 4mo agoI know many people dislike this movement but really, I think it's a good idea. Yes, it removes the "free" internet as it was 20 years ago, but that's gone already anyway. Yes, it opens up the way to a police state without anonymous internet access, but arguing against any law to be against that just seems like straight up anarchism to me. I see both children and adults being manipulated by corporations with "algorithms". Honestly, treating social media, porn, and other things as drugs would probably even be the right step.
- tsunamifury 4mo agoThis is not about the good of the people. And the sooner you realize that this type of regulation will be used to manipulate you as much as what you fear is happening already the better. The government is an entity that acts to protect itself. It has and always will fear an open and informed public.
- vitriol83 4mo agomajority of parents are in favour of such a ban, otherwise they wouldn't do it if social media companies hadn't made social media a total cesspit of disinformation, child grooming and algorithmic manipulation then the outcome might have been different
- jMyles 4mo ago> Honestly, treating social media, porn, and other things as drugs would probably even be the right step. Adopting the drug prohibition model is fine, if what we want is to lavishly enrich the social media cartels, and visit upon the rest of the world needless crime, misery, addiction, and death.
- cenamus 4mo agoObviously OP is not
- stavros 4mo agoA better measure would be to mandate that social media platforms can only show you content from people you follow, and in chronological order.
- Fervicus 4mo agoSomehow all the countries are suddenly proposing the same thing. You'd think at least one of these countries might try something different if they actually cared about the kids, like banning algorithmic feeds. Not suspicious at all.
- beejiu 4mo agoI'm probably going down a conspiracy theory, but it's notable when all the Five Eyes countries seem to start talking about the same problem and pushing through legislation. The US would probably do the same if not for the constitution.
- da-x 4mo agoI think there's some sort of 'social pressure' between nations. Policies during the COVID-19 era come to mind.
- hnhg 4mo agoIt's called lobbying.
- someguyiguess 4mo agoNot sure how closely you follow US news, but a majority of Americans feel that the current US administration is not all that concerned with the constitution, so that not really a blocker.
- maccard 4mo agoI don’t think it’s suspicious - I think trust globally in tech companies has been deteriorating at the same pace in most western countries is all.
- someguyiguess 4mo agoBut so has trust in government (for very good reasons). And those same unscrupulous governments are heavily influenced by the very same tech companies people are suspicious of.
- shrubble 4mo agoPassword to bypass the Magna Carta and hundreds of years of reserving power to the British people: “Its4TheKids”
- raincole 4mo agoIn other words, governments around the world finally found the cheat code to demolish online anonymity.
- notarobot123 4mo agoI happened to talk to a teenage relative about this possibility the other day and she said that she'd be fine with a ban. It seems that it's not as big a deal if everyone's in the same boat. Parents genuinely have a hard time navigating this because drawing a line for their own children has the effect of socially excluding them. It's not ideal in many senses (what age checks are we talking about here) but its worth thinking about some of the positive effects this might have on the young people growing up in the mess we've made of new media.
- cs02rm0 4mo agoI'm absolutely fine with a social media ban for under 16s. And completely against it actually meaning strong identification of over 16s.
- tsunamifury 4mo agoIt’s pretty amazing how all major nations are using various reasons to force global ID and verification all at once isn’t it?
- sufficientsoup 4mo agoDoesn't even seem like various reasons.
- dom96 4mo agoA lot of reporting seems to state that it's only for "high risk social media". Is that the case? Are they really picking and choosing which social media they will ban for under 16s?
- eunice 4mo agothe party of lord mandelson do not care about kids
- markus_zhang 4mo agoI like it. We don’t need social media. It is just a convenient way for the elites to collect data and push agendas, and people can communicate in other online ways without limiting themselves to short attention span, doom scrolling and others. TBH I’d be happy that it doesn’t exist. Quebec has it, too. IMO it should be banned for under-18s instead of under-16s. The only problem is how to enforce it.
- jbvlkt 4mo agoExactly, I stoped using all social media and I feel way better and my screen time went significantly down. It is harder to communicate with some people (have to use email or sms) but it reduced mostly meaningless small talk we can do in person.
- peab 4mo agoInteresting that Canada is trying to do the same thing. Seems suspiciously similar. The idea that this is about surveillance is also interesting. I think it's important we ask: could we invoke this ban without surveillance? - identity scan is one solution But surely there are other solutions? Can't you just make laws that get kids in trouble if they get caught on social media? Kids get in trouble for missing school.. there are other incentives than identify checks, surely?
- maccard 4mo agoThe solution is parental controls on devices.
- academic_84572 4mo agoSurely we know by now that this is not enough? Kids find ways around everything. Even adults find the 'digital wellbeing' tools on Android and iOS useless. Just look at the multitude of apps available for digital self regulation these days (ScreenZen, Freedom, BlockSite, etc). No single solution works for everybody at the moment. Regulation by itself is also insufficient. But maybe combining regulation with parental controls plus other measures will be effective. A 'defense in depth' or swiss cheese strategy, with multiple layers of protection. I do hope we figure out what layers are needed soon, though. It feels like we're running out of time.
- maccard 4mo agoExcept they are. I’m not aware of any actual bypasses of parental controls on iOS or android. You choose apps and allow or deny them, and you provide limits which are guarded by passcodes or parental prompt (on iOS at least). > It feels like we're running out of time. I mean, does it? It feels like we’re running guns blazing into something that will be trivially bypassable (hello free VPN to some random European country - remember Hola?).
- jdsnape 4mo agoI think the idea is that while individuals will absolutely find ways round it, it should help to reduce the network effect of everyone a kid knows being already on it. How true that is remains to be seen. One campaign I’ve liked is one in the UK to try and get the parents of whole year groups in school to agree to not buy phones until their children are a certain age. This removes a lot of the peer pressure of ‘my friends all have one’.
- Devasta 4mo agoIf they were really concerned, they'd be doing something about the algorithmic feeds pumping right wing vitreol into everything and Elon constantly begging for race wars to start. It's very obviously not about the children.
- rdiddly 4mo agoA lot of talk about the "why," absolutely nothing about the "how." The "how" is where the problem is.
- demorro 4mo agoDead on. If we could wave our magic wands and ban "harmful social media" without negative externalities we'd probably do it, but we can't. Sometimes I think legislators think laws are these magic documents which just directly mutate reality.
- andy_ppp 4mo agoGreat! Can we ban it for adults too?
- zetanor 4mo agoJust ban social media.
- ciupicri 4mo agoSo "login with Facebook" won't be an option anymore for kids.
- kyledrake 4mo agoWhen considering how to think about these restrictions, I turn to my 15 year old self back in the 90s and ask him "would you want the government to block you from using IRC, forums, guestbooks, and social web sites?" His response would have been "go to hell", and he would have figured out a way to get around it anyways. Unless they're actually planning to track one government ID per person in a database, a truly horrifying idea that this project is slippery sloping towards (because if the current design is easily defeatable, then why do it at all?) Having access to the entire internet, warts and all, as a kid did not ruin my life, it was an escape from the people I did not fit in with in the place I grew up, it taught me about humanity and ultimately led to a successful career for me. Dave Bohnett, the founder of Geocities, stuck his neck out to protect the LGBT section of the site so that young adults could find a place to have community despite often growing up in places where it was dangerous to be gay, like it was for him when he grew up in a very conservative suburb of Chicago. I don't think anyone has said more negative stuff about Facebook then I have, and I literally made a platform eager to try to destroy it, but this is not the way to do it. We should be thinking very, very carefully about when we let the government become our parents in scenarios like this when the unintended consequences seem quite likely be enormous and when there's no mechanism for retracting the law once it's implemented and we find out that, surprise surprise, it didn't magically cure depression in young adults.
- Peanuts99 4mo agoSocial media sites today are nothing like the forums and guestbooks of the 90s. Social media now is highly effective at developing addiction like symptoms as well as driving people to decisive topics and conspiracy theories. It has a measurable effect on teenagers wellbeing and academic performance too. My bigger concern is the how rather than the why on this topic.
- kyledrake 4mo agoI'll agree with you that I'm far more worried about the how than the why, exponentially more worried. I'm just not sure if "this time it's different". There was abundant decisive political smearing and conspiracy theories on Geocities. They had an entire section called Area51 (https://geocities.restorativland.org/Area51 https://geocities.restorativland.org/Area51). There was a politics neighborhood that had a bunch of crass political bashing (it's pretty funny to read about someone off his rocker about Janet Reno). There was also the Art Bell show playing in every radio market with him interviewing vampire experts and whatnot. The old Internet/culture really wasn't all that different than it is today.
- dyauspitr 4mo agoFantastic idea. Now ban phones for under 16s as well.
- thesumofall 4mo agoIf there was any smart way of doing it, we should block it for everyone. Very little good has come of it. Also solves the age verification problem. It’s soooo difficult to not fall into the addiction trap, and I’m exhausted from keeping myself away from it.
- Gonxa6282 4mo agoTbh, I think that this is still putting the blame on users and not in the actual tool designed to be as addictive as possible. It's like blaming people who get addicted to cigarettes.
- evilturnip 4mo ago"Think of the children" used to shoehorn in the police state. Shudder to think where this will be in 100 years.
- baal80spam 4mo ago100? More like 10.
- drnick1 4mo agoMaybe, in the future, the UK will thing twice before electing a socialist government.
- gib444 4mo agoIt's supported by both major parties. Quite strongly by the Conservatives in fact
- Bender 4mo agoI asked my Ouija board some questions and determined that: - Select 3rd parties friends of government officials will be taxpayer funded to verify government ID's and live facial recognition. - Said data will be "accidentally leaked" and somehow a myriad of 3rd parties and criminals end up with this data. - People will be encouraged to purchase some form of identity protection monitoring service. - People will conclude or theorize that all of this could have been avoided. I have some ideas that could solve this without impacting anyone currently using the internet but there are no financial incentives for government officials to participate thus such ideas are dead in the water.
- gib444 4mo ago- It will somehow cost at least £1bn because everything costs £1bn these days (NB it'll start off at a lower figure)
- cedws 4mo agoWhen the OSA came into force I checked the iOS App Store and the top 10 apps in the UK at the time were all dodgy free VPNs. This legislation is utterly idiotic. I'm sick of this government, they won't be getting my vote in the next GE.
- conradfr 4mo agoNot sure if true (as it was on X) but I read that Bluesky would be exempt?
- gib444 4mo agoOur governments seem to have just two tools for big issues in society (because they're quick and cheap): - Nudging, propaganda, posters and automated announcements - New legislation to ban something If something can't be fixed with either of those, nothing gets fixed. Shockingly this happens a lot! Their mates will make some money and lobbyists appeased, then they'll get distracted about what to ban and clutch pearls over next, and the issues our children have will persist and get worse
- phyzix5761 4mo agoWhen you try to ban people from doing something they find ways to do it illegally. Humans have a need to socialize and kids are not going to stop using the internet for that just because of some law. Aided by their parents, I'm sure, they will find seedier ways to do this. Ways that are not regulated at all, even by sensible laws that prevent direct exploitation. The parents obviously don't care that their kids use social media, otherwise they would take steps to stop it. These laws are not going to bring back the days where we all were riding our bikes outside and reading physical books. That's not the way of life for these kids. But it's, very likely, going to put children in a more dangerous situation as they try to find some kind of solution to their social needs online.
- theptip 4mo agoCounterpoint - this is a coordination problem, there are studies suggesting that most kids would rather not participate in the whole social media thing but an individual can’t opt out. It’s very possible that a policy like this could give everyone a new Schelling point to coordinate around, and thus change the default behavior. We will see! I certainly agree this policy won’t prevent the kids that really want to use an app.
- danw1979 4mo ago> When you try to ban people from doing something they find ways to do it illegally. Humans have a need to socialize and kids are not going to stop using the internet for that just because of some law. They’ll do what my son has done his whole teenage life, having been banned from social media by me before he even asked for it, and go out and see their mates in real life !
- oddb0d 4mo agoTo this I say: Hey kids, go grow your own groups using free/libre open source decentralised, distributed post-blockchain holochain-powered https://moss.social https://moss.social
- tarkin2 4mo agoI teach children. You have no idea how much social media has affected their attention, memory, critical reasoning and social skills: the social repercussions will be felt for decades. And this isn't mentioning exposing easily malleable minds to propaganda paid for by states that see the UK as an enemy, all before their critical reasoning skills, and awareness of their emotions, and how their emotions can be used against them, have had the chance to develop. I expect this to massively electorally backfire on the government. But in the long run, it will be more than worth it. The only alternative would be to blanket ban phones in schools, although they'll still be plugged into social media the minute they leave.
- nly 4mo agoTbh I've never understood why a strict non-negotiable ban on phones in schools hasn't been in place. This is an easy win with no negative consequences for adults.
- thisislife2 4mo agoI too don't like all this "age-verification" approach, but how does banning phones in school prevent kids / teens from using social media?
- Aurornis 4mo agoThe goal is to prevent phones and social media from being a distraction during school time. The schools in my district did it. Several kids ran huge campaigns with flyers and news media involvement trying to protest it, but after that died down the response has been very positive. It’s not going to satisfy the people who think that all children everywhere must be banned from social media at all times whether their parents agree or disagree. It does have a very positive impact at schools.
- thisislife2 4mo agoOh ok. I agree with you from that perspective - phone are indeed a distraction and should be banned in school. I do find that whole debate strange though because in India, schools (not government) have never allowed phones in the first place and our society has been largely fine with that practice. Nobody has accused any school of "overreaching" or made such mandates a political issue. In fact, my mischievous nephew's phone was confiscated by his school Principal who told his parents that she wouldn't return it till the term ended because they shouldn't be giving a phone to him at his age!
- melodyogonna 4mo agoI think every country should adopt this actually. The sort of reasoning I see on social media shouldn't be exposed to children.
- monssooon 4mo agoWhat do you think this will lead to? Will mesh networks explode in popularity or maybe the adults will just log their kids in - and UK will then make that illegal... But how to surveil the parents then. Personally I fear this will just become whackamole against communication innovation. it feels to me like an addition in a broader attempt to control communications in general.
- Gigachad 4mo agoI hope it leads to people going outside and talking face to face again.
- haunter 4mo agoAnd this will apply to everyone once you have to prove you are over 16.
- hollow-moe 4mo agoNice, let's hope they will be using their creativity and smarts to understand deeply how tech works and bypass these or create their own spaces. We have high hopes for you young people.
- appybara13 4mo ago[dead]
- ajay-b 4mo agoI agree that children under 16 should be limited in their exposure to social media but... I am deeply worried this will be used to either limit everyone else's access (particularly in "times of crisis") or may lead to a national identity requirement for accessing the internet. It's a little alarming the tech-minded public has not pushed back on this more.
- theultdev 4mo agoYeah where are the site banners? We had more for BLM than this. Guess gone are the days of net neutrality and privacy protests by devs.
- egberts1 4mo agoIs it just me or did I missed a notice that Bluesky is not on the list of UK's banned social media?
- ruicraveiro 4mo agoHear, hear!!!
- MyMemoryfails 4mo agoI still think we're solving social media from wrong angle. We should fix the addiction nature, so we can still use social media for informative purposes. (like hobby forums) Before the big platforms took over, there was lots rich information sources about tech and programming I wouldnt be there if those forums did not exist. Right now its just bunch negativity dopamine hits. It's still weird how those social media bans are essentially "anything with chat/messages requires age check". If social media is affecting learning, then ban using phones at schools, it's been very effective all around world with no privacy risks.
- DrProtic 4mo agoBluesky seems to be exempt, I wonder why.
- CrimsonCape 4mo agoUltimately, if a kid is super digitally connected and using social media all day, can't his/her final grades be enough evidence? I'd like to hear some arguments how we must ban certain technology in school; meanwhile it's plain to see to anybody with a brain cell that there is an entire corrupt stack from state government down to the individual classroom that *students must not be given failing grades*. Here's a thought experiment: provide an opinion to both of these assertions. The rule of the experiment is you cannot give an opinion to one without answering the other. - We should ban social media in school - We should ban failing grades in school
- _imnothere 4mo agoIs social media bad for children? yes (heck it's even bad for adults) Did the UK do this for good cause? absolutely not, they're doing this for the same purpose of all that age-verification bs.
- Arch-TK 4mo agoI don't really care about a ban like this, but I do strongly care about exactly how they plan to enforce it. There are technical solutions which are both inexpensive, would be just as effective, and which would fully respect the privacy of all individuals. But, regardless of whether the push is well meaning or not, the UK government has a historical track record of trying its best to eradicate the concept of an individual having any right to privacy from the government. A significant chunk of the population seems to even believe that wanting privacy from the government is a signal that you are doing something illegal. People have been making comparisons to 1984 for years, but the current state of the UK should genuinely be raising alarms. It's like they're trying to compete with China for control over their population.
- Caldwell543 4mo ago[flagged]
- Caldwell543 4mo ago[flagged]