Technology UK to Ban Under-16s From TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and Other Social Media Platforms

[lokamoka820]

Content source

https://www.ghacks.net/2026/06/16/uk-to-ban-under-16s-from-tiktok-instagram-youtube-and-other-social-media-platforms/

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced that children under 16 will be banned from using a range of social media platforms, including Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X.

The ban is expected to come into effect early next year and places the UK within a broader international effort to strengthen online safety rules for minors.

Services such as YouTube Kids and messaging apps like WhatsApp and Signal are not included in the ban. Enforcement will focus on technology companies rather than children directly.

Platforms that do not take sufficient measures to prevent under-16s from accessing their services could face multimillion-dollar fines.

What the UK Social Media Ban Covers for Under-16s​

The platforms covered by the ban include:

• Snapchat,
• TikTok,
• YouTube,
• Instagram,
• Facebook, and
• X (formerly Twitter).
• Platforms like YouTube Kids and messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal are not included.

The UK is adopting a model similar to Australia's, which last year became the first country to ban under-16s from creating social media accounts.

 

[TairikuOkami]

So UK has decided to return to the dark ages, well that is pretty obvious, when you look at it, still?! In the meantime parents raise toddlers with a tablet. Odd times.
While social media can be easily abused, they are designed to make people more sociable, kids already have too little of that and this will isolate them even more.

 

[RoboMan]

This is extremely wrong and harmful.

This ban treats all online interaction as inherently harmful while ignoring the educational, social, and developmental benefits that many young people gain from digital participation.

For many teenagers, social media is not just entertainment; it's where friendships are maintained, events are organized, hobbies are shared, and communities are built. A blanket ban can isolate younger teens from their peer groups, especially those who struggle socially in person or live in remote areas.

Of course internet brings dangers within, that's a fact. But that's a job for the kid's family/parents, rather than the government's.
There are several tools that the government could provide or facilitate in order to help parents take care of their kids online.
Many security suites also offer parental control modules/apps, that can restrict what the kid watches or uses, who he talks with (even alert the parent when a certain trigger word is written). Gosh you can even set up a timer to block the phone at certain times.

A global ban is unnecessary, ridiculous, and brings more problems than advantages. Actually, it places on the table a much bigger threat: the government's plan to control & moderate opinions. There's no news on the fact that UK's politicians are trying to push online speech regulations. Passing this would be a huge issue in the future.

 

[Halp2001]

The idea of protecting minors sounds reasonable, but experts point out that bans often just push the problem elsewhere. When official platforms are closed off, teens usually find their way into less regulated spaces — from shady apps to even the dark web. And let’s be honest, age checks are rarely bulletproof, so kids will always find ways around them. Even outlets like LBC warn that a weakly defined ban could end up as a very public failure. At the end of the day, it’s less about the ban itself and more about recognizing the practical limits and side effects.