Google · Apple · Donald Trump · Wall Street · BBC Technology
Social media ban - bold and blunt, but no silver bullet
Compiled by KHAO Editorial — aggregated from 1 source. See llms.txt for citation guidance.
◌ Single Source
When the reporter arrived at 10 Downing Street this morning to hear the prime minister announce the UK's social media ban for under-16s, the reporter had to hand in their phone for security reasons.
Key facts
- Sir Keir Starmer's news was bold and blunt: yes there will be a ban, yes it will follow Australia's model and yes, there will be additional curbs which will impact older children, aged 16 and 17
- The temporary anxiety it gave me was perhaps a small insight into how many of the nation's 13 to 15-year-olds were feeling, as they too waited to hear the outcome of months of discussion
- When the reporter arrived at 10 Downing Street this morning to hear the prime minister announce the UK's social media ban for under-16s, the reporter had to hand in their phone for security reasons — This would mean when someone aged under 16 sets up a device in the UK, they can't download banned apps from the app stores
Summary
The temporary anxiety it gave me was perhaps a small insight into how many of the nation's 13 to 15-year-olds were feeling, as they too waited to hear the outcome of months of discussion and speculation about their online lives. Sir Keir Starmer's news was bold and blunt: yes there will be a ban, yes it will follow Australia's model and yes, there will be additional curbs which will impact older children, aged 16 and 17, as well. But Australia's ban has faced well-documented problems, not least because most children who had social media accounts before the ban was enforced in December, still have them. The response from the UK government is the same answer the reporter hear every time there's an online safety intervention.