Topics / Technology and speech
Should children under 16 be banned from social media?
Should the UK prevent children under 16 from holding social media accounts, regulate the design features children are exposed to instead, or leave decisions mainly to families within existing online safety law? The disagreement turns on how to read evidence about harms and benefits that is still developing, and on how to weigh child protection, children's rights, parental authority and enforceability.
Positions
- Yes: Heavy social media use is linked to anxiety, depression and poor sleep in children, and because peer pressure makes individual opt-outs unworkable, only a universal minimum age of 16 will protect them.
- Restrict features, not access: Rather than banning children from social media, the law should require platforms to switch off the design features most linked to harm for under-16s, such as engagement-optimised algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, autoplay and night-time notifications.
- No: The evidence that social media harms children is mixed, social media also brings real connection and support, and decisions about children's use should rest with parents within a framework of strong platform regulation, not with a blanket legal ban.