nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

UK to ban Social Media for under 16s .. will we/EU follow suit? Is it enough?

aidanodr

This being discussed this morning on UK talk radio -

https://www.rte.ie/news/uk/2026/0615/1578413-social-media-ban/

So - my view - The only ban that would have any hope of working is a SMART PHONE ban for all under 16s. Up to then you get a "regular" old style mobile phone with no internet, just to call & text, to be contactable .. plenty of them out there.

Other than that, while a good move, the under 16s will easily discover work arounds on there smart phone eg VPNs and the like. And its also the ALGORITHMS that the likes of UK Government need to go after inside the social media companies, thats the drug pusher here.

I wonder will EU/Ireland follow suit? Should they.

Anyway - i think this needs to go far farther, maybe its a start in that direction ..

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ancapailldorcha

I think it's a great idea. Sunak's government passed the Online Safety Act but I think banning social media for under-16s is much more important. I think every account should be credit card-verified to get round the issue of VPNs. Unfortunately, the Brits adore banning things so VPNs' days may be numbered as well.

I'd be all for a smartphone ban as well. No good reason for children to have them.

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058439741/uk-to-ban-social-media-for-under-16s-will-we-eu-follow-suit-is-it-enough

They could still use tablets which they all have for school now. And even smartphones have educational uses.

The best way to do it is on a device level. Implement it for Windows, macOS, IOS & Android that certain sites are blocked by default unless it's registered to an adults account. That way parents/schools can be certain that the device is ok when they set it up for a kid. Basically, be able to impose blocks, but make it as frictionless as possible.

One thing I noticed about discussions online is that a lot of the people against this are right wingers. The people who are normally about "protecting women and children" are really against measures like this.

DoctorEdgeWild

The only aspect of this that you can guarantee is that the government here will make an absolute balls of it. I would say Starmer is the most inept PM I've lived through… but then I look back at the last handful and realise it's a Hell of a challenge to be the worst.

Personally speaking, I don't want to be giving my credit card info to social media companies (who have proven themselves unable to keep info safe), nor do I want to be giving them to the government (who have also proven themselves unable to keep info safe). I'd rather the protection of children was the responsibility of those who are responsible for those children, rather than me and my credit card.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552064#Comment_124552064

As a rule of thumb, the more people harp on about something the less likely it is that they actually care about it. I've seen people who couldn't contain their glee at the Online Safety Act openly defend Grok's production of AI CSAM. The right don't give a toss about women and children and they never did.

You could put a levy on every device sold that goes to the government. The device cannot access adult material unless it is unlocked by paying the levy. You'd still have access to educational content and entertainment suitable for younger people and if the device is for an adult, they can unlock it.

It's long past time we reigned in these vile corporations. We've spent far too long behaving sycophantically towards them and fretting about their bottom lines. All they care about is short term profit. I'm hoping that London and Brussels are firm when it comes to taxing and regulating them.

scottser

Who is going to enforce this ban? Because it doesn't seem to be working with things like knife crime, anti-social behaviour, sexual assault, drug trafficking, violence in schools and a load of other crimes that 16 year olds get away with on a daily basis.

spaceHopper

It's my job to keep an eye on what my kids are doing online, and I do. It's not the governments job to do it. It is their job to make sure that service like assessments and services for things like ADHD, ASD and children's mental health function. Or that TUSAL actually has the resources to do their job. Or if my child got sick and I brought them to a hospital they were seen by a doctor before it's too late to save them.

This is not about child welfare, it's about removing everybody's privacy because they don't like that why can be criticized online or the likes of the Irish Water protests, or we say anything about a country murdering people left right and center but it's ok because they aren't the same religion and have brown skin.

Oscar_Madison

I think we’ve come too far to reverse things- strong clear education from early years may work for future generations - but banning it just sends it underground - you can supervise what you can see happening - if your under 16 is using social media away from the family setting unknown to the family due to a legal ban, that makes for a very vulnerable teen in my view - education and ongoing parental support guidance and interest as to what the teens are engaging in online is the only way forward

Perfidious Cretin

There's no way they can ban VPNs. What about ones for companies?

I use Mullvad. €5 a month, no account and you could even put money in an envelope and post it to them if you wanted ultra privacy.

What happened to parents having responsibility for their own kids instead of trying to outsource it to the government..

TheValeyard

They've tried this in Australia. Too early to say success or failure. But plenty of criticism of it so far. Youre dealing with teens. They will find a way around it no bother. But other hand with dont reduce beer or cigs to 16 because some do it.

However, I do not believe this is about child safety, but rather about controlling narratives and information.

bucketybuck

I'd think more of it if it wasn't a roundabout way for the govt to collect facial recognition data from everybody.

1984 dressed up as "won't somebody think of the children".

Mike Murdock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552432#Comment_124552432

60% of 12-15-year-olds in Australia are still using the platforms.

https://mollyrosefoundation.org/more-than-60-of-australian-children-still-using-social-media-despite-ban-for-under-16s-research-shows/

RoyalCelt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552482#Comment_124552482

Pretty good result saving 40% of kids from this. Time to bring back the Nokia 32 64's!

spaceHopper

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552494#Comment_124552494

Or their parents were stopping them, so it could easily be 100% of kids who were using SM before the ban still are.

Mike Murdock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552494#Comment_124552494

Bring back the 3210's!

RoyalCelt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552502#Comment_124552502

Addicted to snake we were.

Perfidious Cretin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552032#Comment_124552032

I'm sure giving all your biometric data and IDs to Israeli companies and the likes of Palantir would have zero negative consequences..

WoopWooWoo

only was around it is for the likes of Facebook and TikTok to detect VPN usage and enforce it but there never going to do that as would cost them millions in lost revenue. Rte player is actually surprisingly good at it to detect VPN usage, one of the best sites I’ve seen for it. Porno sites would never invest in it. Other options really is lock down windows and iPhones and androids and have to confirm your over 16.

There’s no real way of stopping but they need to make it harder to bypass.

kowloon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552032#Comment_124552032

I'd be all for a smartphone ban as well. No good reason for children to have them.

My phone connects to a blood glucose sensor. The phone can then relay the reading to a third party. Mine is accessible by the hospital, but they're regularly used to relay the results and any alarms to a child's parents. The NHS have been giving them to T1 Diabetics for a while now.

My phone also keeps track of my carb intake. Some insulin pumps connect to the sensor to manage the insulin dose.

You can get readers for these things that aren't phones, but you lose a lot of the functionality.

Anyway, that's one case where having a smartphone is kind of essential.

scottser

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552502#Comment_124552502

Bring back the landline in the sitting room, where if you wanted to chat up a girl you had to do it in front of your folks while they were watching Coronation Street

Coolcormack1979

about control and nothing else.when Twitter,facebook etc first came out politicians had no problem with it cause the great unwashed weren’t up to speed on it.but now that we can get to see what’s really going on and not what they want u to see or hear it’s time for a ban dressed up as won’t someone think about the kids

SuperBowserWorld

Edit ... sarcasm

aidanodr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552064#Comment_124552064

"They could still use tablets which they all have for school now. And even smartphones have educational uses"

SMARTPHONE vs TABLET - a smartphone is small, very portable and easier to conseal. It also has a SIM Card connected to the mobile network with lots of essentially unfettered data/internet access 24/7.

A tablet generally does NOT have a sim card ( restricts where they can browse ), needs to be connected to WIFI somewhere, larger to carry and harder to conceal. So no where as convenient use wise as a smartphone, which these days matters to lots of people it seems - the convenience thing.

Also if it is a school tablet - most of which are purchased from a school? or an affiliate to the education system? - they could come locked down out of the box alot easier than a mobile phone.

What I said in the OP - Instead of a Smartphone - perhaps anyone UNDER 16 could have whats called a DUMB PHONE

https://www.androidcentral.com/phones/best-dumb-phone

To make calls, texts and be contactable, maybe restricted Whatsapp & the like. If all under 16s had this kind of phone then the pester power thing for smart phones might dissipate somewhat?

I underrstand what Kowloon says above about certain individuals needing a smart phone for medical reasons or similar. I am sure this could be worked out.

I just think banning use of apps on a device already connected to the net 24/7 wont work. Kids are very resourceful and will easily find ways around any app/software bans.

Its really to decide what parents actually want with respect to there kids effective unfettered access to the complete internet while out and about particularly. Having a device that is connected unfettered for most part to the complete internet 24/7 while on there childs person is very very hard to police both by the parent and by tech companies - yes the latter can do things but no 100% guarantee that would stop workarounds. Plus most parents would not be tech savvy enough and no where as savvy as there kids??

valoren

A smart phone is an incredible tool. The phone isn't the problem. It's the social media apps that are designed to mess with our reward circuitry. The very first thing it asks after you install it is to give it permission to send you notifications. Then it turns into a slot machine where every *ding* becomes a spin of the wheels and you might get something interesting. Variable ratio reward schedule. Those crack like shorts/reels. The endless scroll with a flick of a thumb giving us a squirt of dopamine seeking out novelty. The For You curated feeds based on algorithmic recommendations. The ultimate for these companies is to get people addicted since all they want is to keep people on them for as long as possible so they can throw ads at them - the attention economy. We know they are addictive, deliberately so, so the rationale is that children shouldn't have access to apps that cause behavioural addiction. Is it right that a child is watching something stupid like Alphabet Lore and then has to endure a 30 second ad for scumbags like Tony Bet? Nothing stopping teens having phones and they can still access whatsapp et al to contact their social circle. Surely removing exposure to the social engineering of social media is a good thing.

TheValeyard

If they dont block Bluesky (lots of rumours at the moment) then you've just fcked your own argument about protecting children and giving the far right extra ammo.

Jack Daw

It's nothing to do with protecting children, all about trying to get rid of anonymity online for adults, only way they can prove whether you are over 16 is photo ID has to be provided, so in order to "protect the children" if you want to use social media they'll try and push it through eventually so that you have to scan in your passport,drivers licence etc and your online anonymity and ability to say whatever you want is gone.

Enter Username Here

Jim O'Callaghan has said many times that he is pro chat control, the EU's attempt at taking our privacy away, and it has long been suspected that he will try to introduce version 3.0 when Ireland take over the EU presidency. This seems like he might use this as a segue into that.

From last year: https://www.iccl.ie/press-release/international-experts-call-for-halt-to-governments-plans-to-break-encryption/

If it was really about the children, then why not invest in some proper research as to the cause and solution instead of attempting to take the easier, less effective route.

Grayson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124552916#Comment_124552916

Thanks for letting me know the difference between a tablet and a phone. I honestly thought they were just HUGE phones.

Yes, that was sarcasm.

The thing is that giving a child a "dumb phone" also called for some reason a feature phone, doesn't stop them from accessing content on other devices. Most kids have tablets at home. They also might have an actual computer. Giving a child a phone that can't use a browser or apps only potentially blocks them from access through one source. BTW, many dumb phones, like nokias come with browsers. They have opera mini installed. And a nokia was top of the list on the page you provided.

A OS level block is better. It's easier for parents to administer. It would work if a child used a VPN.

Apple just released a whole suite of features that do a lot of this.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/apple-previews-new-child-safety-features/https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/apple-previews-new-child-safety-features/

https://www.apple.com/child-safety/https://www.apple.com/child-safety/

Iphones/ipads cost a fortune, but at this point they may be the safest devices for children.

DoctorEdgeWild

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/124553492#Comment_124553492

Exactly this, it's crazy that people are so blinded by 'protect our children' that they want to put their trust in EITHER the Government or the Private Social Media companies to handle our personal information. An end to anonymous whistleblowing, an end to anonymous news reporting, and people are welcoming it. Incredible.

SupaCat95

This is not about 16 year olds, this is about forcing people to register for digital IDs similar to what Frank Abagnale told us at a google conference years ago.

LambshankRedemption

I went on to a cough cough adult site recently and it said I had to prove i was over 18 by taking a selfie and it's AI would check my age. I'm 42 and have a full beard. After taking the picture and being analyzed by the AI it came back with the error: Could not confirm subject is human.

Now, i fully accept I'm no oil painting but if the AI can't tell whether or not I am human should we really be using it to check whether someone is 18+ or less?

As others have said this is all about control and nothing to do with kids safety.