this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
504 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

85494 readers
4039 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
504
UK: Under-16s to be banned from social media, Starmer announces (www.bbc.co.uk)
submitted 2 days ago by Tarambor@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
286 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
[–] LordDaveTheKind@piefed.social -5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Agree. And any professional working or dealing with children would agree.

And, for anyone who is telling: "lEt ThE pArEnTs dO tHaT!!11|!!", please put yourself in that situation. Would your parents have been able to set rigorous and effective checks on the media you accessed in your youth? And even if so, the conditions in which a teenager lives today are different than the ones you experienced: average time spent with families is decreasing, the average time that teenagers spend in touch with their peers (not necessarily in person, but also via IM) is increasing, and therefore also the peer pressure. Also, what about those kids with absent parents? What about those kids with toxic or incompetent parents?

Sure, I agree with anyone who says that kids should be guided and assisted on social media in the right environments, or in a way to find the right spaces to express themselves (with hobbies, sports, group activities, whatever), and I’ll vote for anyone who could do anything on that purpose. But we can also imagine flying cars at this point.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Fuck that shit. I'm not a kid and don't want people spying on me.

Just make the parental controls much easier to set up, have media literacy lessons instead, and that would help far more.

You can quite literally set up screentime for your children easily. So why not do that? Why not mandate that a children's phone must have a limited amount of screentime?

People with absent parents still require a caretaker, so then those. And those that have toxic/abusive parents... well, how is it going to improve for them if they can't find help online? If they're prohibited from going outside?

No, I think we should address it by the root; the polarisation and fascist radicalisation, caused by algorithms promoting hateful content, caused by billionnaires' growing exploitation of the proletariat, by which they steer social media to their own whims.

That needs to be kicked out.

[–] LordDaveTheKind@piefed.social 1 points 22 hours ago

Fuck that shit. I’m not a kid and don’t want people spying on me.

I don't want the gOhVehRnMEeNt spying on me when I drive!111! Why should I show a valid Driving Licence when I'm in my car! My car my choice of driving!

Just make the parental controls much easier to set up, have media literacy lessons instead, and that would help far more.

You can quite literally set up screentime for your children easily. So why not do that? Why not mandate that a children’s phone must have a limited amount of screentime?

People with absent parents still require a caretaker, so then those. And those that have toxic/abusive parents… well, how is it going to improve for them if they can’t find help online? If they’re prohibited from going outside?

They would definitely need more guided help. But if professionals who offer this kind of guided help are the first ones on supporting these initiatives, why it's so tough to understand their opinion on the matter?

No, I think we should address it by the root; the polarisation and fascist radicalisation, caused by algorithms promoting hateful content, caused by billionnaires’ growing exploitation of the proletariat, by which they steer social media to their own whims.

That needs to be kicked out.

Oh, finally a solution I could 100% sign for! I would definitely approve that, but how would you explain it to the same people that now are yapping about freedom of expression? Wouldn't they complain about censorship also in that case? And trust me, I agree with you, but I'm already foreseeing people on Shitter (or any other right-wing most favourite Social Network) rallying against it.

[–] Virtvirt588@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

As a person supporting "professionals" you seem quite dead set on supporting what literally is fascism. Your last paragraph doesn't make this any better.