Starmer’s plan to ban under 16’s from social media

Instagram automatically places users aged 13 to 17 into Teen Accounts, which feature built-in protections like private accounts by default, strict messaging limits, sensitive content restrictions, and scheduled sleep mode. Parents can use supervision tools to monitor usage or approve changes to these settings
Here’s a bit more about it

Well done instagram 👏👏👏

Let’s hope the others follow suit.

How does Instagram check ages?

He's introducing several things lately and even authorised the boarding of that Russian ship yesterday I think he's just woken up to the fact that there might be a leadership contest very soon and is fighting for his position.

David49

Phones for children dont have to be smart phones with screens they can be simple that just do calls and texts and cost a fraction of the smart phones.

How does one send and receive texts without screens? 1

If the government were deadly serious they would ban phones in schools. Take them to school then lock them away until home time.
Why is YouTube not on the list.
Gaming Apps arnt on the list. Are they aware that the pervs and bullies get to the kids through these apps.

Cossy

David49

Phones for children dont have to be smart phones with screens they can be simple that just do calls and texts and cost a fraction of the smart phones.

How does one send and receive texts without screens? 1

The dumbphones as they are called have a screen.

Think of your 1990s Nokia functionality, they are like that, but obviously the phones don’t look like bricks.

Maremia

I agree with the Posters who are saying go for the tech companies.

We, and other European nations have gone for the tech companies, it's not that easy. And much as I am disappointed with Starmer on other fronts - on this one, he will be damned either way...

I've consulted AI because, though I've been following this, AI is less wordy than I would be and puts it into better perspective...

High-Stakes Legal Challenges: Tech companies heavily utilize the European court system. TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, famously took the EU to the European Court of Justice to fight its "gatekeeper" status under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Platforms also routinely sue over local state/national laws, claiming they violate free speech or data privacy laws.

Disputing "Addictive Design" Claims: When the European Commission formally charged TikTok for having an "addictive design" (such as infinite scroll and autoplay) that harms minors, TikTok pushed back publicly, calling the EU's depiction "categorically false and entirely meritless."

Ultimately, tech executives will aggressively fight regulations in court and in the press to protect their profits. However, when the laws are passed, they fall into line rather than risk being shut down or fined billions of dollars

The 'tech Bro's are powerful. Starmer is at least attempting to do something about this - not infrequently - toxic online environment which we know is addictive to youngsters. They can be very impressionable.

If they'd been more willing to take the whole issue seriously, maybe Starmer would not have endorsed this act. It will hopefully have some effect, even if limited.

My son rationed my two grandsons' internet access for most of their lives on a daily basis, but it was an absolute battle, and very exhausting... and he had the luxury of time on his side to monitor it as he was working from home.

Another meaningless sound byte,and gimmick, grabbing statement from Starmer and Labour.

To curry favour and win a few extra votes before the coming Ashton in Makerfield Election.

This proposed ban will not work.Simple as that. They need to start really punishing the people who own run these low life
Tacky Apps and Web Sites with massive fines and even harsh prison sentences.

petra

If the government were deadly serious they would ban phones in schools. Take them to school then lock them away until home time.
Why is YouTube not on the list.
Gaming Apps arnt on the list. Are they aware that the pervs and bullies get to the kids through these apps.

The locking away is what happens in many secondary schools. It certainly did in my grandchildren's school and they are in their early twenties. I asked upthread if anyone had exprerience of the smartphone free childhood initiative in primary schools. There are posters outside the primary schools I walk past in our town, so am a bit surprised nobody else has commented. Would be very interesting to hear from the grandparents of Primary School age children. As I said before, there is no single solution here.

This is another way of forcing us all to the digital ID. We will probably all have to use facial recognition to use social media. Not just the under aged children.

Mamie our local primary schools that we have GC in have a no phone ban up to yr 6.

When in yr 6 if they have a phone it is given to their teacher when they go into class, (must be switched off) and collected at home time.

GrannyGravy13

Mamie our local primary schools that we have GC in have a no phone ban up to yr 6.

When in yr 6 if they have a phone it is given to their teacher when they go into class, (must be switched off) and collected at home time.

Yes I think that is pretty standard. If they are walking home or using public transport it makes sense. There is much more to the Smartphone Free Childhood movement though.
I am sure most grandparents would agree with this:

"Smartphone Free Childhood is a movement of families standing together to delay smartphones and social media – turning isolation into collective strength.

Together we’re giving children back what truly matters: time to play, space to grow, freedom to be.

Because childhood should be shaped by families and communities, not algorithms."

Mamie

One of the recent Apple updates required proof of being 18 by passport, driving licence or credit card (not debit cards because you don't have to be 18) without which they would be blocked from certain content. It is a start.

I dont like that idea because after I uploaded my passport, driving license or credit card, one or all of those images would be stolen.

arum

This is another way of forcing us all to the digital ID. We will probably all have to use facial recognition to use social media. Not just the under aged children.

No Big Brother wanted here.

I think the dumphones should be called simplephones instead.

Making a law banning something does not stop people from doing what they want to do. If something is wrong to do, good morals stop a person from doing it, not laws. If children were educated as to why they shouldnt view porn, send mean texts or spend hours and hours at a screen and the children agreed with the logic or outcomes of the habits, they would police themselves if it is something they wanted to do. Yet certain drugs are illegal and some still choose the self-sabatoge. Some children are enticed by breaking the law.

If there were technology to stop the signals as easy as it is to get a signal, the whole world would "stop".

Yes, this is the world our GC and GGC are born into and no Starmer ban will help.

If teenagers are not supposed to have sex, will that stop their passion?

Tech companies cant help either. This is the world now, just as imagined.

I’m not happy about children’s faces (or mine, if it comes to that,) being stored in either the ether or on a secure server,
but if you have a passport, you have to have a photograph on it.

I'm 100% supportive of any measures which help to get our young people off their phones. I think it's of note that China has extremely strong laws banning their children from accessing social media despite it pushing the likes of Tik Tok on our children! Of course nothing will work completely, some children will find their way round to vile sites and continue to be abused and damaged but at least it gives parents the opportunity to use the law to do their best to keep their children safe. By all means have a go at Starmer if you don't like him but I think there are real errors of judgement to go at and this isn't one.