To think we absolutely have to ban social media for under 16s.

Yep, just like drugs, alcohol and smoking. Buy them some at age, what 9+? Or at least from high school, that’s reasonable, right? Everyone else is doing it. And make sure it’s in their pocket/bag 24/7 until they’re adults

Wow, not much shocks me these days but the perpetrator of this being made head boy in the same year made me gasp. I would go nuclear. WTF.

Because a lot of parents won’t parent their children. They look to teachers, councils and the state to undertake the hard decisions they won’t make usually via laws and rules.
There is no reason for an u16 year old to have TikTok. There is no practical, educational or emotional reason to watch the app. Why do parents allow their children access it? It is documented beyond any doubt that it has a negative impact on the brain (adult brains too). Yet parents allow their barely teenage children watch it unsupervised. Then they call on schools or government to limit access to it.
Just remove it from your child’s phone. End of. It’s done. It’s gone. What’s the issue?

A thought experiment.

Imagine that our next Prime minister is the one that gives you creeps now. (Farage, or Corbyn, or anyone who you definitely would not trust).
What you are suggesting with the ban is to give away your power and authority to that government. Do you feel THAT powerless and incompetent at parenting?

To those of you suggesting that having an argument 'but that is illegal' will help with your child relationship - If bike helmets and seatbelts were not mandatory - would you not use them? If you still would - how would you enforce it? Use the same power. If you would not, then I don't get you - you are not worried about your children's physical safety, why worry about some social media.

The majority are not. A ban would at least push the issue more forcefully at parents who minimise the damaging impact of social media on young teens. And if they choose to ignore it then hopefully there would be implications for them.

If parents are so against, why are they allowing it? My dc don’t have TikTok (dd1 does but she’s 17 and only got it last summer). Parent your children.

Yep. All that. And also preventative police raids to check everyone's devices. Because clearly we cannot leave without regulations and enforcement.

What would the punishment be? A fine? Jail? Kids removed by SS?

What other parental rights would you like to give up?

It’s absolute madness to say that someone who is 15 years, 364 days old cannot be trusted at all with a smartphone, and then given them free rein the day after.

It’s a smartphone, not crack cocaine 😂. Would you have police searching 15 year olds for smartphones on the streets?

So the sensible parents and children who use smart phones sensibly, learning how to use them safely, have to suffer because some use them irresponsibly? For all the parents who are calling for a ban, they are surely capable of parenting their children and stopping them from using it irresponsibly?

There’s loads that teens can be doing apart from spending their days on social media! As a society, we should be encouraging things like art, music, dance, sport, drama, Duke of Edinburgh, Cadets etc. Unfortunately our state education system, on the whole, doesn’t provide enough of this to get children interested. Letting teens spend their days on social media is far easier for parents as well.

I honestly think we will look back on this period where social media is freely available to children with absolute horror.

The social media companies will scream blue murder at any prospect of regulation, but then so did the mill owners in the 19th century when faced with the prospect of a ban on child labour.

Here’s an idea. Pass a law which make it illegal to sell a smartphone to anyone aged under 16 and make parents responsible if their kids are caught with a smartphone.

No need for any restriction on dumb phones, so kids can stay in touch with their parents.

And play Snakes.

You think 13 year olds are currently being given guidance by parents about social media use?

Some are (as they should be). Parents should not be letting children blindly sign up to social media. Those that do probably wouldn’t abide by any change in the law anyway.

You think 13 year olds are currently being given guidance by parents about social media use? 13 year olds and under are already posting and seeing awful things. We have to let our kids outside and learn how to navigate roads / strangers etc.. no one HAS to be on social media. Maybe they will choose not to use it because they’re not addicted to it and haven’t been conditioned at a very vulnerable age to think what they see on social media is real life. Many parents do not take the risks seriously and this is why young kids are glued to phones till 1/2 am even on school nights.

I suspect that decades into the future people will look back in horror at the fact social media was freely accessed by kids.

I totally agree with this. Children need to in the real world learning how to negotiate life but too few parents let them experience this without helicoptering/lawnmowering

What would those suggesting a ban suggest teenagers do with their time instead?

13 year olds can and should be introduced to social media with guidance and support from parents. There should be an open relationship to discuss any issues that may come up.

16 year olds who are going to parties, having sex and working aren’t going to be amenable to that. This policy would set a bunch of 16 year olds (who of course would have no idea how to use social media) free. It would be a total disaster.

It would be like keeping DC indoors until they are 16 and then setting them free. Totally reckless.

There are many comments on parenting.
I understand many parents are too busy, too tired to spend enough time with their children.

If you then say life should be more affordable for the parents to spend more time with children - I'm with you.
If you want to give away a bit more of your privacy to governments and companies who exploit you that you dont' have time to parent - I say wake up!

I can't believe how many are saying that it's impossible for parents to do this alone. We choose to have children, which makes them and their upbringing OUR responsibility, not that of the government. If you're out somewhere and another person were to tell your child off for doing something, just about everyone would say 'how dare you, what my child does is nothing to do with you', and yet, you all expect the government to do the hard stuff for you. FGS, parents, do YOUR job and PARENT!

I'm with the minority here - I strongly disagree with the ban. No, we should not ban SM to under 16s.

There are several issues together.
People who propose the ban include Whatsapp and YouTube to SM. Banning YT to under 16s is like banning books for previous generation. YT has a huge amount of high quality educational material.

We (people) already have a massive power imbalance with governments and corporations. By asking introduce age-restriction you give even more power to them - you are effectively asking them to check ID of every internet user (or SM user, but the step to internet is actually very small). Do you really want all those corporations to have a record of who you really are? Or who your children are? Their IDs, dob, address? They already have the phone number. I love this site because I can freely express my views here.

There can be improvements without the ban. For example, to stop SM being 24/7 for children. Say, a child's account set by the parent with a block for the night time and school times. The block means the child cannot post and nobody can interact with that account. Say, if you post in the evening you don't wake up to any nasty comments. And you don't worry about it while you are at school. (The timing of course should be set on the SM server, not the device. Otherwise the children will be changing time zones.) Imagine all work emails would be limited to working hours - children should have that peace.
There could also be some closed groups for children to interact only with the parent-approved friends. Say, a parent could mute or block a 'friend' who mistreats the child.
One could think of all sorts of other measures that do not worsen already existing power imbalance.

13 year olds haven’t all got free access to social media. Many parents already don’t allow them free rein at that age. It’s a case of parents monitoring social media use. Just because a 13 year old is legally allowed access to certain apps doesn’t mean that parents should let them.

The genies out the bottle. In my day, it was all too much tv watching by kids. Parents gave the ability to limit what sm a child goes on , they need to do this.

A SM ban would be completely unenforceable. They’re not going to send parents to prison because little Johnny or Jenny lied about their age to get on TikTok.

I agree any regulation should be on the SM companies to proactively identify and take down illegal content while referring matters to the police if it’s a criminal offence like hate speech, cyberbullying, sexual grooming, etc.