Today’s Social Media Ban Announcement: Discussion

[ByeByeTikTok]

I haven’t seen a thread for today’s expected ban on social media for Under 16s so thought I’d start one. If there already is one pls link and I’ll get this deleted.

What will it likely include?
What won’t it include?
How do you and your kids feel about it, especially if they’re already using it?
Will you follow it, and when?
Will people try to get round it?

Do you mean this? It is very different to @justasking111 claims that "in times of emergency eg protests, Belfast etc all videos, etc will be blocked in the UK".

UK regulator orders social media firms to adopt measures to stop viral illegal content | Social media | The Guardian https://share.google/VB6CHbuyHmuSb1w6e

Socialism is usually a bigger state so that’s why. Authoritarianism is the culprit too.

I get some of the upsides for this but the increase in control can’t be dismissed.

Yep
I followed the OSA it’s taken years to get in place
it’s never ever ever been about child safety

that’s just a stick t beat people with if they say no

this is a way to get people used to scanning their face and giving there id

I don’t use any of the main platforms like Insta Twitter tick tock
i use Facebook now and then but I’ve had the account for years
but if they want me to give up my id they can fuck right off

My 10 year old daughter hasn’t got a smartphone yet and it’ll be a lot more effective and easier for me in the future to say to her you can’t be on social media until you’re 16 cause it’s illegal rather than saying something vague about social media being bad for you. I’m very happy about this and there’s been groups lobbying for this,parents signing petition etc so it hasn’t come out of the blue.

I get some of the upsides for this but the increase in control can’t be dismissed

This is why I'm not overly worried... yet.

This is no different to the age-verification legislation. It's easily circumvented, impossible to enforce, and therefore does not compel compliance, so it's of limited use for nefarious purposes due to being simple to avoid. However, it is yet another step down the road of the public eagerly running into the arms of State Control, censorship, monitoring of Comms as a matter of routine, big data, data-harvesting, social credit, digital ID, etc etc, so from that perspective it is still concerning.

Again though, I am in total agreeance that SM influence on children does need addressed, just that performative, knee-jerk nonsense like this isn't how to go about it.

You have a different opinion.
I don't disagree that data harvesters will want the generated data.

However in a tale as old as time, and seen in present day China, and Iran, politicians want to give the people only the information they wwant them to receive, with the right spin.

Henry Novak s family had to fight the police to stop them putting out false information about their son.
The "Sophie of Dundee" child had false information put out about her by the police.
How many stories have we seen doctored by the press or ignored???

Children have died because of it. The big players have not acted swiftly or responsibly.
I admired Australia for doing it first. The internet is not a safe place for children.
Until it is then I support this.

I totally agree with this.

I, and many others with late 80's/90's born DC never relied on devices or waited for any government to do their parenting for them.

Although it'll probably be down to parents to implement the new rules on their DC, many already having proved it's not something they're willing to do hence yet another decision to do it for them bought in .. so let's wait and see.

Hopefully the fortune spent hasn't been a waste of tax payers money.

Yes, none of this is anything to do with "socialism" though.

China and Iran are both Authoritarian, but they are not Socialist, unless you are still taking the old Stalinist States' self-described brand of "Socialism" tag and using that to describe outright Authoritarian despotism.

No doubt Vance will appear at some point in the next couple of days bemoaning the UK's decent into "socialist" madness, decrying the death of Free Speech and such, while ignoring the fact his own government is desperately trying to dismantle equality, and civil and legal rights in his own country while subjecting anyone suspected of being less than 100% white American to state-sponsored lynchings. As I said, Authoritarianism transcends Left and Right, both are as guilty of it as each other, and it does not, in isolation, signify that a State or Government is Socialist.

I think growing up without social media lays key foundations re: maturity, resilience, intelligence, all things which mean an 18 year old is much better placed to handle social media than a 16 year old
I think locking in those essential coping skills and solid foundations early, without the pernicious influence of SM, is actually going to be really positive for so many people. It will be great to see children building social skills the old fashioned way by playing in person rather than chatting over Snapchat

I agree with every word of this, @FinchiePink, but achieving it's going to take one hell of an adjustment when the simple method of not giving a smartphone to under 16s is anathema to so many

The usual excuses about school schedules, bus passes and the rest all relying on them are easily solved if the will's there, but persuading some that shrieks of "S'not faaaiiirrr, I WANT ..." aren't the same as getting could be harder

FWIW I'm no fan of government control either and would much rather such things be left to individuals, but it's got beyond that now with too many children zombiefied by screens and losing the ability to communicate in any other way

https://euroweeklynews.com/2026/05/31/uk-school-introduces-conversation-classes-as-kids-lose-ability-to-talk/

So who will be punished if a child accesses social media? How will they be punished?

All these people going on about government “controlling” you - you realise these tech companies are literally controlling the content of your kids minds with what they are showing them in their addictive feeds? I totally support the ban.

I’m 33 and grew up in the 2000s when it was a wild west with Myspace, Facebook (aka bullying and semi-naked party photos all being released online), forums, gaming etc - most parents didn’t have a clue what their kids were doing. My parents thought I was doing homework! Everyone who is so sure they know exactly what their kids do online, I think is being really naive. In my school people had porn, ISIS beheading videos, all sorts on their phones - and this was a “naice” posh grammar school. Nowadays is 10x worse with the addictive brain rot pushed on us on all platforms, it is a scourge on society.

Yes Youtube can be educational, but even then it’s so addictive, whatever you look up. I want to look up a watercolour painting tutorial - there are so many clickbaity suggestions that it’s easy to suddenly spend 2 hours watching tutorials and not do any painting. Even BBC news, you read an article and at the end it is pushing 3 similar ones on to you. All these platforms want is your attention and clicks. It’s all very well saying “parent well” but it’s much harder to go against the grain when all your kid’s friends are allowed something. Smoking, alcohol, driving are for adults for a reason - it’s not left to the discretion of the parents!

Maybe, I'll be interested to see how it will work in practice. I think social media can be really beneficial for some children, if used appropriately. Which is why I think an outright ban is too much.

Agreeing with every word.

Yes, that’s a fair point. At least he won’t be completely cut off.

It’s interesting he doesn’t go on the news to discuss parents role in policing how much and what type of content their very young teens consume online though.
The current proposed legislation is a lot more than many parents are doing to keep their own children safe.

My teen’s best friend moved to Australia recently. Teens there cannot access YouTube at all with an account. So they cannot watch videos at all on YouTube. I think the same is proposed here. You cannot use YouTube.

I do think the YouTube total ban is concerning my eldest is 18 he used YouTube for revision for GCSEs, teachers point the kids to educational sites some kids will not be 16 when they take GCSEs and will not be able to access it. Other kids may not have ID to get accounts - do many 16 year olds have id they feel safe sharing online? The face certification/verification might work well for us adults but for teens it does not work well.

You tube will be the interesting one. If WhatsApp is included that will make my DDs ability to coordinate her “train buddies” getting on the same train to school trickier and make my life a little harder.

I have family in China. This is harsher believe me.

He said WhatsApp and blue sky were excluded.

Teachers will have to find non-you tube resources. Now is the time to pressure bbc to modernise bitesize, not push kids who are supposed to be doing homework into the infinite click you tube environment.

Is it no longer possible to watch YouTube without logging in? Sorry, I don't use it much, so not really sure?

My son at university has to follow lectures on YouTube. He likes it because you can replay them. I wouldn't like to see GCSE and other youngsters blocked from educational information.

What's App included in the ban? Ridiculous.

It’s not, many people are just making things up at this point.