LONDON — Britain will ban children aged under 16 from using a range of social media apps, including Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube, to protect them from harmful content and excessive screen time, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Monday.<\/p>\n
The plan was met with mixed reaction, with some praising Starmer for taking action and others questioning the effectiveness of a blanket ban. <\/p>\n
YouTube and Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, warned Monday that a blanket social media restriction could push kids into unregulated online spaces.<\/p>\n
\u201cBlanket bans push kids out of such curated, supervised, beneficial experiences and towards anonymous, less-safe services,\u201d a YouTube spokesperson said. Meta said a ban could drive teens to online spaces without any parental controls.<\/p>\n
Starmer acknowledged the challenges, but said: \u201cI do believe we can enforce it.\u201d<\/p>\n
He added: \u201cTeenagers drink before they should, but we do not then say, \u2018in which case let us abandon any attempt to stop them buying alcohol.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
Starmer \u2014 who is under pressure to step down<\/a> from members of his own party over what they see as poor leadership and could face a challenge from within his Labour Party in the coming days or weeks \u2014 acknowledged that some teenagers would try to find their way around a ban. But he said he is \u201cnot prepared to compromise on the safety and happiness of our children.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cEvery parent can see it with their own eyes. Social media is making children unhappy,\u201d said Starmer, who has two teenage children. \u201cI\u2019ve heard first hand from families crying out for change and we will do right by them.\u201d<\/p>\n The ban, which is expected to take effect early next year, makes the U.K. part of a growing global movement<\/a> to tighten online safety for children. Australia<\/a>, Canada<\/a>, Brazil<\/a> and Indonesia<\/a> have introduced legislation or announced age-based restrictions or requirements for children\u2019s access to social media. France, Spain, Denmark,<\/a> Thailand and South Korea are among others studying or developing similar approaches.<\/p>\n The U.K. plans to follow the same model for a social media ban as Australia, which last year became the first country to bar under-16s from holding social media accounts. Platforms that fail to take reasonable steps to exclude children younger than 16 could be punished with multimillion-dollar fines.<\/p>\n The U.K. said its ban will apply to platforms including Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X, but not YouTube Kids or messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal. Starmer stressed that enforcement action will target tech companies, not children. <\/p>\n Starmer said the move was a \u201cbig moment for our country,\u201d adding that he will go further than Australia’s measures. <\/p>\n He said the government will act to prevent strangers from contacting children on gaming and livestreaming platforms. Authorities are also considering additional measures including overnight curfews and breaks in infinite scrolling for those under 18. More details are expected next month.<\/p>\n The decision follows a public comment period in which the government received 116,000 responses from parents, the tech industry and children. More than 90% of respondents wanted an under-16 ban, the government said.<\/p>\n Ellen Roome, a children’s online safety campaigner whose son took his own life at 14 years old, welcomed the move. She believes her son died after an online challenge went wrong and has campaigned for legal reforms to give parents access to children\u2019s social media accounts after their death.<\/p>\n \u201cThe tech companies, if they wanted to make changes, they could have done that by now. They\u2019ve chosen not to do it,\u201d she said. \u201cWe need to come down hard on them. If they\u2019re not going to do it, we need to be very strict.\u201d<\/p>\n But others say research in Australia has shown that age verification is difficult to enforce, and that a blanket ban seemed to be a snap decision that does not address a deeper problem \u2014 the way social media algorithms push harmful content to young people. <\/p>\n \u201cThis is far too easy to work around. It is based on age verification tools that have been shown to be ineffective to date,\u201d said Kate Edwards, head of education at the Molly Rose Foundation, which was set up in memory of 14-year-old Molly Russell, who died by suicide after being exposed to self-harm content online.<\/p>\n \u201cIt does nothing to address the actual problem itself, the harmful algorithms, the harmful content that is existing on those platforms,\u201d Edwards added.<\/p>\n Meta shares \u201cthe goal of keeping teens safe online,\u201d a spokesperson said, adding: \u201cWhich is why we developed Teen Accounts to automatically limit who can contact them and the content they see. Like others, we don\u2019t think bans will achieve this goal.\u201d<\/p>\n Meta said the move by Australia had shown how \u201cbans risk isolating teens from online communities and information.\u201d <\/p>\n Jon Crowcroft, a communications systems professor at the University of Cambridge, said people supporting social bans are well-meaning but probably misguided, and changes could prevent children from accessing sites they need.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a real risk this will drive some users to worse sites and policing devices is close to impossible technically,\u201d Crowcroft said. <\/p>\n Other critics including the Open Rights Group have expressed concerns about age verification companies and how users\u2019 private data is protected. <\/p>\n The ban could further inflame tensions with the U.S., which has warned that regulations should be narrow and not violate free speech protections, according to a statement from the U.S. Embassy in London. It said it was also concerned that regulations would place greater burdens on American technology companies.<\/p>\n