Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The UK is following in Australia’s footsteps and bans all children under 16 from using social media. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the ban on Monday, saying he would introduce legislation to Parliament before Christmas, and the protections are expected to take effect by spring 2027.
The ban was designed with the support of nine in ten British parents, according to a survey of more than 116,000 people conducted by the government. It’s designed to allow less time to scroll and more time to play, according to Official government announcement.
“Parents want to keep their children safe and happy, but the online world has made that harder than ever,” Starmer said in a statement. “I have heard firsthand from families demanding change, and we will do what is right for them.”
The ban will affect platforms including Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, Snap and X. It is not designed to prevent people under 16 from using messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal.
Growing awareness of the harms that children can be exposed to through social media, as well as the potential mental health problems it causes or exacerbates, has led a number of countries to consider banning social media for teenagers, with Australia is leading the way. The country imposed age restrictions on social media at the end of 2025, to serve as a pilot test for other countries around the world. The UK said it would borrow from lessons learned in Australia, using a highly effective age guarantee to prevent children from bypassing safeguards.
Starmer said the UK’s restrictions would go further than Australia by including a blanket ban on any services with live streaming and communication functions with strangers, which would also place restrictions on gaming sites. He added that the ban on live streaming and communication with strangers will also be turned on by default for children under the age of 17, to prevent brinkmanship at 16 years of age.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer made the announcement to an audience of parents whose children have been negatively affected by social media.
“We are going further than any country in the world by banning social media for children under 16 and putting in place broader protections to return children to their childhoods,” Starmer said. “This is a line in the sand. The tech giants had their chance and failed, but we are stepping in to protect children, support parents and create a new normal for future generations.”
Any companionable AI romance chatbots designed to simulate sexual relations or role-play with users will need to impose a minimum age of 18. The government is also currently considering an overnight curfew and infinite passing periods for under-18s, with more details due to be announced in July.
How do social media services respond?
Starmer’s announcement comes just a week after he gave tech companies three months Prevent children from taking, sending and receiving nude photos. Taken together with Internet safety lawwhich requires all online services that could expose children to harmful content to verify people’s ages, the UK rules constitute some of the toughest global restrictions facing big tech companies.
They’re all designed to keep kids safe, but platforms have a different perspective. In response to Starmer’s announcement on Monday, some companies suggested that bans on major platforms could push children towards less regulated and less safe parts of the internet.
A Chat spokesperson said: “We share the government’s goal of protecting young people from harm online.” “However, since most of the time spent on Snapchat is in private messages between friends and family, outright bans that separate teens from those relationships do not make them safer — it may simply push them to less safe platforms.”
Perhaps the most controversial service that will be included in the list of platforms that the government plans to ban for children under 16 is YouTube, which is used in many homes and schools.
“We’ve invested in expert-led, age-appropriate experiences and virtual protection for teens for more than a decade and will continue to do so,” a YouTube spokesperson said. “YouTube is a vital resource for young people, parents and educators. A blanket ban is pushing kids out of such curated, supervised, beneficial experiences and towards anonymous, less safe services.”
Spokespeople for the other social media platforms listed in the announcement did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Social media companies are not alone in expressing their concerns about the ban. The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) also said on Monday that the ban may be misguided.
Chris Sherwood, chief executive of the organisation, said: “Despite good intentions, blanket bans on teenagers’ access to social media platforms cannot be the answer to keeping children safe online.” Blog post. “For countless young people, social media can be a lifeline. A place where isolated teens find community, where LGBTQ+ youth find acceptance and where neurodiverse kids find ways to learn and connect.”
He added that if children are forced to hide their social media use from their parents, they are less likely to be honest when something goes wrong, such as being a victim of bullying or grooming. “This is a gift to abusers, not protection for children.”
Sherwood said children’s right to connect and have a say in how they can participate in the digital world should not be stripped away because of technology companies’ inability to keep them safe. Instead, the onus should be on tech companies to prioritize the well-being of young people over engagement metrics, with regulators holding them accountable.
Kerry Moscoggiore, CEO of Amnesty International UK, echoed his sentiments It’s called blocking “Right diagnosis but wrong prescription”
“You can’t solve a design problem by blocking access,” she said. “If the diagnosis is that social media platforms are harming children, the treatment should be to regulate these platforms, not exclude children.”
