REFNATION
RightsNationalClosed · Final

Should the UK ban social media for children under 16?

Yes 46%No 54%128 votes cast

Australia has passed the world's first law banning social media for children under 16 from late 2025, with fines up to $34.4 million for violations. France, Austria, Canada and Denmark are advancing similar age-based restrictions or digital safety laws. Critics including Amnesty Tech argue the bans ignore children's real habits and technology needs while raising privacy concerns.

Sourcezamin.uz
Jump to opinions· 4

What's striking about this vote is how flat the age curve is on a question that looks, on its face, like a generational fight. From the youngest voters to the oldest, support for a ban hovered in a tight band either side of the result's overall 46%, with only the 55-64s breaking meaningfully in favour and the over-65s among the most sceptical of all — hardly the pattern you'd expect if this were really about parents versus teenagers.

The sharper line runs through gender: men here split down the middle, while women who voted leaned clearly towards No, a divide that cuts against the instinct that restricting children's online lives is primarily a mothers' cause. If anything it suggests the practical case against a ban — that it can't be policed — landed harder with women in this sample than the protective case landed with anyone.

The vote lands the UK squarely inside a fight now playing out from Canberra to Paris, where lawmakers are testing whether platforms, not parents, should carry the burden of age-gating the internet, and where critics warn such laws misjudge how children actually use technology. Britain's own age-verification experiments around online pornography hover in the background as a cautionary tale of good intentions meeting determined teenagers.

That tale showed up directly in the debate: the floor's respected No case, from "Minfyourbuisness", recounted a son who "took him two minutes to download a free VPN" to beat the UK's existing age checks, while the chamber's leading Yes voice, "Glasses", pressed a different enforcement worry entirely, joking the UK should "ban it for adults who think holding magic phone, whilst crossing roads, makes them invincible." Between a joke about grown-up distraction and a demonstration of teenage ingenuity, the practical objection won out.

A ban that Australia is enforcing with nine-figure fines couldn't win a majority here on the simple suspicion that no fine would actually stop a determined fifteen-year-old.

LeftCentreRight
46%
Yes · 59 votes
54%
No · 69 votes
Yes No
By gender
Male
49/51
Female
44/56
By age
16–24
44/56
25–34
46/54
35–44
46/54
45–54
47/53
55–64
53/47
65+
39/61
By political leaning
H. Left
45/55
Left
60/40
C. Left
57/43
Centre
70/30
C. Right
33/67
Right
34/66
H. Right
25/75
Spread the wordShare
Debate

4 Opinions

Sign in and vote to share your opinion.
The Ironclad Civic Paternalist
Voted yesCentre

I have seen first hand what social media does with my own eyes. You get given a phone number, so use it! If you want to see pictures of your friends, guess what go see them and make a memory, not via a screen but in the actual real world

The Peacemaker
Voted noLeft

Simply because the ban would be pointless... The vast majority of 16yr olds will use technology to bypass the ban within a couple of minutes! When they brought in the age restrictions around porn in the UK my son (an IT tech for a major company) explained why it was pointless. He then demonstrated .. Took him two minutes to download a free VPN which by-passed the UK age checking systems by using a server in Holland. (No I don't know what all that means either)

Glasses· 445
The Public-Order Traditionalist
Voted yesRight

Should ban it for adults who think holding magic phone ,whilst crossing roads ,makes them invincible!!