UK Lords Back Ban on Social Media for Under-16s
The House of Lords has voted overwhelmingly to ban under-16s from social media platforms, a move that could reshape digital regulations in the UK. The amendment, passed by 261 votes to 150, was added to the government's schools bill, though the government has signaled it may overturn the change in the Commons.
Supporters of the ban argue that social media use among teenagers is a "societal catastrophe" linked to mental health issues, online radicalisation, and classroom disruption. Former Tory schools minister Lord Nash, one of the amendment's sponsors, said the ban would give teenagers "a few more years to mature" before engaging with platforms.
Government Consultation on Social Media Restrictions
The government has indicated it will attempt to reverse the Lords' amendment in the Commons, while continuing its own consultation on potential restrictions. The consultation, which began last month, is assessing the merits of a ban for under-16s, as well as overnight curfews and measures to prevent "doom-scrolling".
Political momentum for a ban has grown following Australia's move last month to restrict under-16s from 10 major social media platforms. More than 60 Labour MPs have joined the Conservative Party in urging a similar approach in the UK.
Criticisms and Concerns
Not all peers supported the ban, however. Labour peer Lord Knight of Weymouth warned that a blanket restriction could push teenagers towards "less regulated platforms" and deprive them of the positive aspects of social media. Several charities and campaign groups, including the NSPCC, have expressed concerns about unintended consequences and have called for stronger enforcement of existing safety rules instead.
"The government has shown it will only act under pressure, not principle," said Baroness Kidron, an online safety campaigner who supported the ban. She added that she feared the consultation could become the "playground of the tech lobbyist".
Liberal Democrats and Crossbench Peers Support Ban
The Liberal Democrats and crossbench peers also backed the amendment, adding pressure on the government to deliver "concrete proposals for a workable plan." Education spokesperson Munira Wilson said, "While we may differ on the best approach, we believe there is a shared responsibility to act."
The Lords' amendment requires the government to determine which platforms should be inaccessible to under-16s within a year. Companies would then be required to implement "highly effective" age checks to enforce the restrictions.
Impact on Children and Teenagers
Supporters of the ban point to numerous studies linking excessive social media use to anxiety, depression, and body image issues among young people. Lord Nash cited "overwhelming" evidence of harm, including cases like that of Molly Russell, a teenager whose father has spoken out against the platforms where she encountered harmful content.
Opponents, however, argue that a ban could lead to teenagers using VPNs or alternative platforms to circumvent restrictions, ultimately proving ineffective. They also highlight the role of social media in education, communication, and creativity.
Future of the Debate
The Commons vote on the amendment could be politically challenging for ministers, given the growing support for the ban across parties. The government's consultation, which runs for three months, will examine whether more robust age checks could be implemented and whether features that "drive compulsive use" should be limited.
As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the issue of children's safety online is unlikely to fade from the political agenda anytime soon.
