this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
199 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

85420 readers
5328 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
199
UK: Under-16s to be banned from social media, Starmer announces (www.bbc.co.uk)
submitted 7 hours ago by Tarambor@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
83 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
[–] IratePirate@feddit.org 10 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (3 children)

Social media has had a negative effect ~~on the youth~~, it sucks.

FTFY. Algorithmic social media owned by American big tech is a net negative for anyone involved, save the billionaire owners of these platforms. If you feel like banning something, ban algorithmic social media in its entirety. Deny these networks to operate in your country, full stop.

Just don't give me that crap about "social media bans only for under-16s", which is just a pretext for introducing identity verification and killing anonymity on the net.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Alcohol has a negative effect. Historically it has not gone well when countries have tried to ban alcohol.

Adults can make their own decisions. They can consume things that are bad for themselves. They can smoke, they can drink, they can gamble. Kids, including teens, do not have brain developed enough to comprehend the consequences for their decisions. They might understand the words you're saying if you try to explain the consequences, but they wouldn't fully grasp the magnitude.

Not to mention there is 100% more damage done to a developing brain. It changes the way their brains function that does not happen when someone starts using social media only as an adult. The same goes for drinking, gambling, and smoking is just bad for everyone.

In adulthood, social media use is also linked to activation in the brain’s reward centers, but two key differences may lessen harm, Prinstein said. First, adults tend to have a fixed sense of self that relies less on feedback from peers. Second, adults have a more mature prefrontal cortex, an area that can help regulate emotional responses to social rewards.

https://www.apa.org/news/apa/2022/social-media-children-teens

ban algorithmic social media in its entirety

You want the government to define an algorithm? Sorting by newest first is an algorithm... It would just be a ban on social media, which I can guarantee nearly everyone on this site would call absurd as well.

[–] Virtvirt588@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Exactly, we have people against people because of this situation when the actual focus should be corpos. There are agruments which support such bans; however, the one thing they forget is who is the victim and who is the abuser. Because last time I looked, the abusers should be banned not the victims.

But even with that in mind, age has no place here, because the induced ageism is the entire drive of this entire law and movement.

Fascists are experts in dividing people and diverting the blame.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Yeah I agree with all of that. There is more appetite for the youth ban is all. I dont want verification and believe there are huge risks for government over reach here, but I think the goal of getting kids off social media is brilliant.

Same reason smoking bans are generational, its easier to pass.