The UK’s New Under-16 Social Media Ban Will Cause More Harm Than It Prevents

The UK’s New Under-16 Social Media Ban Will Cause More Harm Than It Prevents from the moral-panic-with-a-british-accent dept Recently, politicians in the UK pushed forward with plans to eviscerate privacy and free speech on the internet by announcing a ban on social media for users under 16 that is set to take effect in Spring 2027. The UK government continues to falsely characterize this policy as a necessary response to growing concerns about online harms for young people. In reality, much like the Online Safety Act, it will cause more harm than it will prevent. Users of all ages are burdened with proving their age before accessing content, with social media platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X included in the ban. There remains no reliable, privacy-preserving method of verifying the age of every internet user and methods vary from one platform to the next. Young people will not simply be protected from being contacted by adults or endlessly scrolling—they’ll also lose access to educational videos on YouTube, local events on Facebook, and potentially cut off from distant friends and family. Public policy must be effective, proportionate and respectful of fundamental rights. Young people deserve better than a policy built on panic, and all internet users deserve a safe and free internet. A social media ban generates headlines, but it will not solve the problem. A Brief History of Age-Gating in the UK Age restriction proposals in the UK date back to a decade ago, when the proposed Digital Economy Bill was put forth to (among other things) restrict young people from accessing pornographic websites. While the Digital Economy Act of 2017 passed without age-based restrictions, it laid the groundwork for later age verification measures. Over the next few years, age checks for porn websites were announced then delayed several times. But it wasn’t until a consultation under the 2016-2019 May government and the 2020 publication of the Online Harms Whitepaper that age verification became a broader idea. In 2023, the UK passed the controversial Online Safety Act, establishing powers that could weaken privacy protections and freedom of expression for internet users worldwide. In July 2025, the government implemented age assurance measures on sites hosting “harmful” content. And despite politicians affirming repeatedly that the Online Safety Act would solve all of the problems with online safety, this year they decided it in fact did not go far enough. American social psychologist and The Anxious Generation author Jonathan Haidt—who has called for age-related social media bans around the world, despite significant scientific doubt about his research—met with the UK Health Secretary in February to push for the ban. In March, politicians introduced plans for a social media ban into the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to “prevent children under the age of 16 from becoming or being users” of “all regulated user-to-user services,” to be implemented by “highly-effective age assurance measures”—effectively banning under-16s from social media. When this proposal came before the House of Commons, MPs defeated and proposed their own amendment: enabling the Secretary of State to introduce provisions “requiring providers of specified internet services” to prevent access by children, under age 18 rather than 16, to specified internet services or to specified features; and to restrict access by children to specified internet services which ministers provide. But the social media ban does not stop there. The provision also requires internet service providers to limit the time kids spend online, and has rules about who can contact them online. These extreme rules will take decisions about using technology away from families and put them in the hands of government regulators. The history of this proposal shows that the UK government has repeatedly returned to the same flawed idea: restricting access to online services by requiring age checks for everyone. But the fundamental problems have not changed. There is still no widely available way to verify age online without compromising privacy—but even if there were, broad restrictions on social media will inevitably limit access to lawful speech, and valuable online communities, and arts and culture. Republished from the EFF’s Deeplinks blog. Filed Under: age verification, kids, online safety act, social media, social media ban, uk Comments on “The UK’s New Under-16 Social Media Ban Will Cause More Harm Than It Prevents” This link does not link to a politician saying that. Re: It links to a page that links to the Online Harms White Paper. Services sanctions by stealth Reap what you sow USA. You voted for Trump two times. At this point, every bad idea by the Starmer regime feels like it’s done intentionally to set the tools in place for the fascist coalition when they won the next general election. The neoliberal right of the party are ripping the copper wire out of the walls to try and make people blame the left when the power goes out. Re: Starmer is actively providing the tools for the next PM after him to have unilateral dictatorial power. And it seems that was the game plan all along. Re: It's somewhat ironic.... …given how traditionally they brand the left of the party as being the wing full of accelerationists… To indulge in content that’s perverse and taboo, by definition, you must be someone who is accepting of the perverse and taboo, and understanding of it in others. Banning ‘kids’ (meaning all unidentified users) from social media won’t prevent them from finding porn, or violence, or AI slop, but it will prevent them from reaching out to tolerant and understanding people, while at the same time training them to surrender their privacy and allow ‘authorities’ to set their boundaries for them. These ‘social media bans’ are nothing more than a scheme to isolate the pure and innocent, and indoctrinate children right into the arms of predators. A Correction It’s spelled “Soucial Media”