Why do people want teens on social media??

I don't want mine on social media but i do want them to have access to youtube.

I think a lot of the mental health issues which seem to keep many youngsters at home from school/work arise from searching on the net and absorbing a log of the rubbish that is out there. Let's see how a ban works out.

I agree with PP there have alway been mental health issues in teens - as the school environment and the heavy exam pressure and fewer options if fail exams probably contribute - as do other things - I think it's easier to blame social media though I don't think it entirely blame free either.

Will be interesting to see what effect Australia or UK band have in years to come.

I was depressed as a teen and highly anxious, there was no social media when I was young. Turns out it was undiagnosed ND. There were many students that struggled with school and had lots of time off - this isn't a new thing, it's just seen a lot more now due to social media. It's not a bad thing that we are more aware and know this may be due to undiagnosed ND and tips to help. The bad thing is we haven't invested in services that could support ND or depressed teens.

Of course social media can be bad for teens, but it's also allowed many to be creative, to have fun - yes it's different to how we used to be, but that doesn't mean it's worse. As teens my friends were at the park drinking alchopops, sneaking out at sleepover etc. how is that any better? Are we imagining teens are going to start playing with Lego and go roller skating? Regulate the companies to provide appropriate content don't ban it.

My children are a bit younger than teens and don't have it, but I think adults saying 'go read a book' and 'get outside like I did' are being meanbto teens. You wouldn't like it if people took away your creative outlet, how you interacted with friends etc.

I grew up without social media - we socialised outside the home and met up with friends etc. My son's teen years were touched by the introduction of social media, but it did not affect his mixing with friends outside the home. My grandchildren are banned from social media but are allowed a certain time each day for gaming and videos. They'd spend all day on it if unregulated by their parents. I think a lot of the mental health issues which seem to keep many youngsters at home from school/work arise from searching on the net and absorbing a log of the rubbish that is out there. Let's see how a ban works out. Can't be worse than what is happening now.

I did see a good post recently saying great - ban social media but let’s invest in Youth clubs, discos, libraries, sports clubs, cinemas, community centres….

There is less for kids to do. Especially that 13-16 age group. Found it sad when the girl interviewed and asked what she would do with her newfound time said ‘stare at a wall’.

I fully support this ban but I also think other areas of youth mental health need to be looked at and invested in. This is a start.

Fair enough, then - I stand corrected; I hardly ever go on Reddit.

But surely that's still a case of material/topics that have been specifically designated as adults only - not the entire (and presumably not the vast majority of the) platform?

If I want to buy alcohol (or, bizarrely, 0% alcohol drinks) at Tesco, I have to show proof or be clearly over 18; but some of these proposals - which may or may not come to pass - sound more like me being made to prove I'm over 18 to buy bread and milk - just because the store also happens to sell alcohol.

You’re wrong. There are many things that come under the new age restrictions on Reddit that are not pornography.

Not all 18+ content is porn, just as not all 18+
rated movies are pornography.

Well, yes - for the parts of Reddit that are dedicated to porn!

Great if they stick to what is now. There is this, so it does depend what comes out of the study in October.

Rapid Implementation Study: Ofcom is conducting an immediate study (reporting by October 2026) to determine the most effective ways for platforms to verify if a user is over 16 without locking out eligible adults.

Given it has been stated if you have currently verified your age under the current over 18 content restrictions you won’t have to verify it again in a different way, it’s very clear it’s not mandatory to share ID.

Many adults won’t need to do checks because they’ve already got an account that:

• has been open more than 16 years
• has a credit card connected to it
• or is linked to an email address that’s age-verified in other ways

Where’s the ‘every suggestion’ coming from, can you say who has said it’ll just be what we do already?

The people constantly claiming this is a digital ID are being purposely obtuse given we already have these checks in place, and there’s every suggestion the checks would be the same.
The government have stated if someone has already done the checks under the current restrictions to over 18 content then there will no additional steps, so it’s quite clear it’s not having to sign up to a digital ID or sharing passport information.

Its not hard to get is it.

Well obviously there’s a range of ways to impose checks and you don’t know which will be used yet.

It’s not that hard to get is it.

I’m literally not sure what point you are making, all those things currently exist. It’s likely the same checks would be used in the social media age restrictions since we already have so many workable ways to confirm age for an online platform.

The porn sites don’t exist in a vacuum, you need to verify your age for many parts of Reddit because the content is deemed to be over 18.

The point is these checks currently exist and operate in the UK and are workable without needing to upload your passport as proof as ID.

The announcement also said Labour would go further than Australia. So I’m wondering what is that, and how will adults’ privacy be impacted.

Yes, surely it's blatantly obvious that, if you're copying somebody else's system that they've already found problems with, you're going to actively look for a way so that you don't also experience those same problems?

It reminds me of the old joke about Bob and Tom: two neighbours in identical houses, where Bob has just finished wallpapering his living room. Tom wants to paper his own living room, with the exact same paper, and so he asks Bob how many rolls he bought, and Bob says "I bought 35 rolls".

So Tom buys 35 rolls and completes the job, but he only ends up needing 15 of the rolls. He goes over to Bob and says "Hey, I bought 35 rolls like you did, but I had 20 of them left over after I'd finished!" Bob replies "Yes, same for me!"

Ok hopefully. But someone posted an MP who talked about passports.

In trying to find who that was I ended up on Ofcom’s view on age verification.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/protecting-children/implementing-the-online-safety-act-protecting-children

I’ll just copy it all

• Open banking. A user can consent to their bank sharing information confirming they are over 18 with the online pornography service. Their full date of birth is not shared.
• Photo identification matching. Users can upload a photo-ID document, such as a driving licence or passport, which is then compared to an image of the user at the point of uploading to verify that they are the same person.
• Facial age estimation. The features of a user’s face are analysed to estimate their age[3].
• Mobile network operator age checks. Some UK mobile providers automatically apply a default content restriction which prevents children from accessing age-restricted websites. Users can remove this restriction by proving to their mobile provider that they are an adult, and this confirmation is then shared with the online pornography service.
• Credit cards checks. In the UK, credit card issuers are obliged to verify that applicants are over 18 before providing them with a credit card. A user can provide their credit card details to the online pornography service, after which a payment processor sends a request to check the card is valid to the issuing bank. Approval by the bank can be taken as evidence that the user is over 18.
• Digital identity wallets. Using a variety of methods, including those listed above users can securely store their age in a digital format, which the user can then share with the online pornography service.

Weaker age-checks won’t be enough (their heading) - they list what is weaker

The announcement also said Labour would go further than Australia. So I’m wondering what is that, and how will adults’ privacy be impacted.

But the porn sites exist in a vacuum, and users are mostly embarrassed or at least coy about the fact that they use them. Nobody feels too ashamed to freely tell others that they're on Facebook or that they watch YouTube.

Think about all of the sites and functions that already exist online whereby you can use a password OR sign in with Facebook or other SM - and then it verifies and pulls all of your personal data across.

If you apply for official documentation online, they already offer a facility whereby you can use a 'trusted' platform/provider to prove you are who you say you are. This could very well be a Google, Microsoft or Meta 'partner'; but the government will never partner up with Filthzone.com for official ID purposes.

Like with so many things - government-mandated or corporate - there's no need to make something strictly compulsory; but it can just leave you so isolated and unable to do basic things in society if you 'choose' not to that it effectively becomes 'soft compulsory'.

Just like online banking isn't compulsory, but when all the branches are finally closed and cash is dead, you'll be able to either to 'choose' that method or otherwise 'choose' not to be able to buy food or anything else, or access basic utilities.

Based on, yes; but it's been described by the government as 'Australia PLUS'. We don't yet know what the 'plus' will entail, but I presume they must have deliberately added it for some reason.

I half-noticed a headline on the front of the Telegraph that suggested they were going to use digital ID to make it work; but they may be wrong or I may have misconstrued.

Well well well bloody said. I so agree with you. It’s not liberty but a horrible £ driven tech cage that literally drains lives away and changes the brain chemistry and relationships of children. You see the outcomes of it and I’m with you, delighted with the ban.

Did you respond to the government survey stating that you were opposed to the ban?

The posts starting its a digital ID are not backed up in any way. We already have this exact same policy for porn sites where the sites where the user needs to pass checks verifying they are over 18 and no digital ID is needed so why would that suddenly change?
Then there’s the additional fact that the social media policy is modelled after the AUS one which again doesn’t require a digital ID

They absolutely have here. Good on them! I was one of the many petition voters (which is how these things get into parliament for review in the first place)

I mean the most cynical viewpoint would surely be that the govt dont want the mental health system (which is already struggling) to become completely overwhelmed by all the preteen/teen mental health issues. Poor mental health in these age groups is at an all time high! Social media is well known to be directly correlated with this. The only person who should be upset here is Farage and all his cronies because now his big tech mates who back him are about to lost a lot of money. Thank god for the ban.