this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
176 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

85420 readers
3751 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
176
UK: Under-16s to be banned from social media, Starmer announces (www.bbc.co.uk)
submitted 6 hours ago by Tarambor@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Under-16s will be banned from using social media, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced.

Starmer says social media is making children unhappy, making it easier for bullies to abuse children, and is "designed to be addictive". A ban would give children more time, security, and more freedom to grow up - as well as more opportunities, he adds.

"That is all any parent wants. They want to know that Britain will be better for their children, that they will get a fair chance," the PM says in a speech in Downing Street.

Starmer adds that the government is "not prepared to compromise" on the safety and happiness of children - and that includes in the regulation and enforcement of this ban. He says the government has listened to and learned from countries like Australia, where a similar ban has already been introduced.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] toebert@piefed.social 30 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

I just wonder who the hell is asking for this from the population? Out of all the things that are being brought up as issues on either side (like immigrants, trans rights, energy, housing crisis, the wars etc) I've never seen this being brought up as the thing anyone has wanted.

How have we reached this level of "democracy" where even protesting is banned..

[–] abbiistabbii@piefed.blahaj.zone 11 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

OAPs who don't understand how the internet or young people work and Age Verification companies.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Emphasis on age verification companies and other beneficiaries…

[–] myrmidex@belgae.social 16 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

Capitalism always trends toward fascism, this is nothing new.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Nothing new, and yet we still do need to talk about it.

[–] myrmidex@belgae.social 2 points 1 hour ago

Absolutely! I did not want to lessen the conclusion, instead I urge to look at the historic and economic context so it becomes clear this is no accident.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 17 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Fascism begins the moment a ruling class, fearing the people may use their political democracy to gain economic democracy, begins to destroy political democracy in order to retain its power of exploitation and special privilege.

  • Tommy Douglas, Canadian politician

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas

[–] yucandu@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

You don’t press a button and an old society disappears and a new one is born next morning at seven o’clock. Society is changed organically, you slough off the old and the new takes the place. You do what you can for people and work for change. And I don’t mind how hard people want to push. But I’ve no patience with people who want to sit back and talk about a blueprint for society and do nothing about it. I got that in Chicago.

  • Also Tommy Douglas
[–] notabot@piefed.social 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

This is quite popular amongst parents where I am. There's also a big local push to avoid kids having smartphones before they're 13. Hopefully by that point they're mature enough to have a better understanding of what they're being exposed to, and are better equiped to know when to turn to an adult if something is upsetting or worrying them online.

Notably this isn't about restricting access to the internet, as kids have many other ways to get online at home, school, a friend's house, or even the library. Instead it's about ensuring they aren't exposing themselves to things they aren't ready for without an adult to guide them.

ETA: A lot of kids are pretty keen on this too, especially if they have had a bad experience online. The idea that none of their peers has a smartphone or social media means there's less peer pressure too.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago

Thank you for the perspective.

I'm surprised parents think this is helping the issue though. I remember being bullied in school and going home after being beaten by other kids, before the time the internet became broadly available or smartphones existing.

Not that I don't think bullying is a problem, rather that this is duct tape with a side of privacy violation for everyone with barely a thought about how to even do the age verification well.

We are not seeing anything about funding the educational system, trying to attract more teachers, aiming for smaller class sizes, funding activities and clubs or more support for parents to spend time with their kids.