Parliament announces decision to discuss a UK social media ban for U16s after Australia’s success.

Prime Minister Kier Starmer has announced that a discussion on banning social media for under-16-year-olds will take place soon. But what can we expect from this decision?

Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brazil are among the few countries that have decided to either ban or regulate social media for children under 16, with many other nations taking steps towards joining them.

Prime Minister Kier Starmer is to outline a plan for the UK to follow suit on Monday, June 15.

At the heart of these decisions is safety. The Australian ban applies to any app that allows two people to interact, and it allows users to post their own material, banning YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, X, Snapchat, and Facebook.

According to Dr Alexandra Boutopoulou, a researcher in social media at the University of Sheffield, there is evidence from Ofcom that suggests that children do experience “real harm online”.

Harm that includes “exposure to harmful content, pressures relating to body image and negative impacts on wellbeing”.

The UK so far has decided they will divide social media platforms into two groups, with the apps deemed to be ‘high risk’ to have a full ban, with apps labelled as ‘safe’ to only feature restrictions.

Despite these intentions and the upcoming discussion, the UK is far off from an official ban.

It can take months or even years for a bill to pass into law, but could a ban fully protect children and young people?

Dr Boutopoulou argued there is a “much wider range of policy options available”.

She said: “The debate is often framed as a choice between unrestricted access and a complete ban, but I believe that this risks oversimplifying a much more complex policy question.

“There is a much wider range of policy options available. One alternative is to place greater responsibility on platforms themselves to design services that are safer for children and young people.

“Many researchers have argued that the focus should not be solely on restricting children’s access, but also on ensuring that platforms are designed and governed in ways that prioritise children’s safety.”

Dr Boutopoulou added that the effectiveness of the ban also needs to be considered.

She said: “ At present, there is limited evidence about the long-term effectiveness of broad social media bans for young people, partly because these are relatively new policy interventions.”

When talking about the effectiveness of the ban, it’s also important to factor in that there are always workarounds.

Such methods have been employed by teenagers in Australia when the ban was introduced.

Noah Jones, a 15-year-old schoolboy from Sydney, told the Telegraph that it had taken him “just a few minutes” to rejoin Instagram after he had been alerted by the app that he was too young.

His method of choice was using his older brother’s ID. To access Snapchat, frowning at the camera was enough to make him appear a year older.

Such ‘cheating methods’ can be used by British kids as well, and it is something that Dr Alexandra Boutopoulou has taken into consideration.

She said: “Young people are often highly adaptable users of technology, which means policymakers should carefully consider how any restrictions are likely to operate in practice.”

This proposed ban has not only worried teenagers, but also parents. This social media ban has been a hot topic of conversation for months, following the beginning of the ban in Australia, even before Kier Starmer’s decision.

Activist Martin Lewis started a discussion on this topic on his Facebook page back in February, generating engagement from several parents.

Some are wary that it will work, such as Rebekah Stevenson, who said: “Everyone will just get a VPN. When there’s a will…”

Others, like Yvonne Riggs, a mum-of-two, believe a full ban might do more harm than good in the future.

She said: “I think that it should be banded by age, under 12s have a direct ban, over 12 to 16 have a curfew of 8 pm. Then the older kids can learn how to use social media without it affecting their sleep. Otherwise, they will get to 16 and not have any idea it will become a dangerous year.”

Another point of view is that limiting social media for teenagers could cut them off socially.

Ellie Thackery, resident assistant at Gordon’s school in Woking, Surrey, said: “I think it should be the parents’ or carers’ responsibility to monitor and limit their child’s social media use. This would allow children to connect with their friends and not be left out of conversations while staying safe online.”

A Save the Children report from August 5, 2022, revealed that children are now playing less and less outdoors. 27% of children play regularly outside their homes compared to 71% of children from the baby boomer generation.

In comparison, since the birth of the internet, more and more children are spending time online. Ofcom data from April 23, 2024, revealed that 1 in 3 children aged 5-7 are using social media unsupervised.

Whether the UK will go through with this ban, and what it will include, remains to be seen, and Dr Boutopoulou believes young people’s voices on the matter should be heard.

She said: “I hope that the discussion moves beyond framing social media as simply ‘good’ or ‘bad’ for young people. 

“It is important that young people’s voices are included in these conversations. Policies intended to protect children should be informed not only by research and regulation, but also by a genuine understanding of how young people actually use and experience digital technologies in their everyday lives.”

Is it posing a threat to young people’s wellbeing, or is it simply another means of communication that just needs to be regulated? It’s a topic that will be debated for many years to come.