Charity warns rushed UK under-16 social media ban could unravel
The child safety charity argues that a politically timed ban lacks evidence and may drive minors to less regulated platforms, contrasting with Australia’s existing block on major social networks.
The Molly Rose Foundation has cautioned that the UK government’s planned ban on social media access for users under 16 risks failing to protect children, warning that a rushed implementation could unravel before it takes effect. The charity, founded by the family of teenager Molly Russell, argues that a blanket prohibition lacks sufficient evidence and urges Prime Minister Keir Starmer to instead enforce strict safety standards for applications, such as curbing personalised algorithms.
The proposed policy is expected to be announced ahead of the Makerfield byelection on 18 June, a timing that has drawn scrutiny from both advocacy groups and political opponents. The Molly Rose Foundation contends that children will likely circumvent age verification checks and migrate to less regulated environments, such as gaming apps, thereby negating the intended protective effects of the ban.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, stated that parents are demanding decisive action that is effective rather than symbolic. He warned that if the government prioritises short-term political announcements over expert evidence, children and families will be left to count the cost, resulting in a step back for child protection. The foundation, which received funding from Meta following the inquest into Molly Russell’s death, maintains that its approach allows platforms an opportunity to improve safety measures before facing potential bans.
This selective approach differs significantly from Australia’s existing under-16 block, which covers major platforms including Facebook, Instagram, X, TikTok, and Snapchat based on specific interaction criteria. In Australia, age limitations are imposed on services that enable social interaction between users or allow the posting of material. The UK government is also consulting on other safety measures, including age restrictions for features like infinite scrolling and limitations on AI chatbots.
Political reaction to the impending announcement has been mixed. Crossbench peer Beeban Kidron described the government’s proposal as a “non-ban ban” and accused ministers of being soft on technology companies, citing profit as the primary driver of tech behaviour. Meanwhile, Labour MP Fred Thomas noted that evidence supports bold action, though frustration exists within the party regarding the perceived delay in implementing the ban.