Government to consult on social media ban for under 16s
Education: Secondary / Tue 20th Jan 2026 at 10:01am
THE government will consult on whether social media should be banned for under-16s in the UK report the BBC.
It said “immediate action” would give Ofsted the power to check policies on phone use when it inspects schools, and it expected schools to be “phone-free by default” as a result of the announcement.
A similar ban took effect in Australia in December 2025, the first of its kind in the world. Other countries are said to be considering such a law.
Click below for the full story.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgm4xpyxp7lo
Adam
2026-01-20 10:32:03
Not the governments role, that is up to parents to control. But as we are now a post freedom state now they will do what they want and even the conservatives seem to think it is a good idea. Oh for people to want dangerous freedom not safe slavery
Dave
2026-01-20 13:08:14
Any adult pushing for under 16s to be allowed on social mdia is frankly, a bit noncey. We didnt have social media in the past, theres no reason you must have it now......unleas you're a bit noncey
Adam
2026-01-20 16:28:53
Dave you are showing a lack of critical thinking. Lets play a thought experiment Dave (I know its hard to think, and especially of second order effects but try for me please). Government wants Digital ID which will be all encompassing and trap us under the eye of the state, think back to just a few years ago and how government controlled people in the pandemic. Gov passes a law about under 16 being on social media, but hey teens find ways as they always , government the uses it as one reason for digital ID, along with many others it is currently building the case for by poorly thought out laws. Stop giving the state powers they are ultimately used against you. Anyone who wants a larger state seems a bit stupid to me. But hey Dave its OK the football will be on later to distract you from having to think
Mr George
2026-01-20 17:49:43
Adam. It is governments role to look out for us. That's why we have speeding limits, seat belts, signs informing us of dangers around, no booze for children, drugs are illegal etc etc. Social media is slowly but surely being proven to be detrimental to children..... so.... what is the flipping difference?
Adam
2026-01-20 19:55:21
Mr George no it is not governments role to look out for us. Have you ever met a politician or public sector employee, petty tyrants at best. All of those things you list should not be laws. Your view of government looking out for us is why we are so f**ked. Everyone expects government to do something to pay for something to protect them from their own stupidity, we have adults who are basically helpless children and its getting worse. If children had to go to school to learn to walk within a few years people would be saying kids cannot learn to walk without government support.
Mr George
2026-01-20 20:19:31
Adam, seat belts, speeding limits, no booze for children should NOT be laws?! Ok. This is where I bow out, clearly speaking to a right weirdo.
Val
2026-01-20 23:03:41
What Adam is saying is that people shove to assume responsibilities. Governments by nature tend to seek subservience and obedience, which is normally extended and abused. A free society requires independent but self-disciplined people, not slaves or indolent citizens devoid of imagination who seek Big Daddy to tutor them. A free society requires vigilant individuals who are the best guardians of their liberty.
Mr George
2026-01-20 23:54:23
Val, have you actually met people?!
Adam
2026-01-21 09:35:41
Mr George maybe people are like that as government infantilises them and supports them when they make stupid decisions. It matters not anyway we have become weak as a nation and are broke. The changes which are going to happen over the next decade are going to make people eyes swivel.
Mr George
2026-01-21 11:30:45
Adam - while I agree a little, a large proportion of people are rather daft and lack common sense. Had there not been a need in the first place to protect, these laws wouldn't have been brought in. Even with the laws brought in, some people still don't think and do idiotic things.
Adam
2026-01-21 13:14:58
Mr George - do you ever think that politicians have to continually find issues to solve (even is they do not really exist) they need to be able to go back and say I did X even if it was not really needed. It is part of the issue we have they constantly tinker and change things to be seen to be doing things. Perhaps we would be better off if we did not have continual tinkering and interference. I like the old model of parliament only sitting when needed, but that would not be good for politicians who need constant attention.
Mr George
2026-01-21 13:38:06
Adam, I gave you examples. You said to get rid of all of them, those laws wouldn't have needed to be made had people been smarter and it wasn't an issue in the first place. We know for example seat belts save lives, so it's law to wear them and yet you think that law shouldn't be in place?!!! Lol. The problems with social media are relatively new, more studies coming out on as to how they harm our children long term, not to mention the fully grown adults who are preying on our children. So, for an example, the law banning child abuse images - you think there should be no laws and it's just politicians tinkering?! You say parents should be in charge, how to parents monitor their children's social media 24/7? How to they protect their children from self-harm groups, or being exposed to porn or extreme ideology, let alone the long term damage it is doing to personalities? I don't see this as 'tinkering', I see this as setting the general public straight about real and present dangers and also damage that it is doing to our children. This is their job, like it or not.
Leave a Comment Below:
12 Comments for Government to consult on social media ban for under 16s: