The under-16 social media ban marks the end of the open UK internet

If you had a room full of developers and you got all of them to create a Linux distro, all of them would have differing opinions on what the ideal operating system should be. Sometimes major differences, sometimes minor - but still different in one way or another. What does this have anything to do with the article? Well...

As with software, people have very different opinions on how our countries should be and what values we should have. From what I know, the UK, Canada, Australia, and even the US are all trying to do this right now. Obviously, the countries I listed are all very different in many ways, but for some reason all their governments suddenly believe it's a priority to take on the responsibility of "saving kids" from social media. The fact that these countries are all doing this at the same time is very peculiar, and I find it very hard to believe that this wasn't planned by them years ago. You'd have to be a complete idiot to believe that this is actually about the welfare of our children.

As boring as it is, carefully read the bills your government is trying to pass. If you're into all the "left vs right" and "us vs them" nonsense, it's time to put that away. Put away the Reddit, the social media, and the Pravda news sources - and pay close attention.

England is becoming less free by the day.

I don't know... I must admit that I don't have a really good opinion about the "free internet" of 2026. It became a real dumptser fire since the creation of these "anti-social medias". Can't say I blame the governments. For my part, what you call "free internet" as lost it"s freedom way before these regulations... But It's probably just the ramblings of an old fart. 🤔

> email address that's age verified

my old gmail account is 22 years old, maybe I should put it up for sale 😆

Quoting: MohandevirIt became a real dumptser fire since the creation of these "anti-social medias". Can't say I blame the governments.

They only became interested in banning social media when they realised kids listen to influencer lies more than they listen to politician lies. Can't have any of that. 😝

Quoting: pb

Quoting: MohandevirIt became a real dumptser fire since the creation of these "anti-social medias". Can't say I blame the governments.

They only became interested in banning social media when they realised kids listen to influencer lies more than they listen to politician lies. Can't have any of that. 😝

"C'est pas faux!" 😂

Thing is, I remember an internet where there was close to no willfully disclosed propaganda or misinformation just to generate clicks and where there was no annoying ads everywhere, everytime you scroll a page. No algorithm trying to steer you into an echo chamber, neither. It really felt free, back then.

Last edited by Mohandevir on 15 Jun 2026 at 11:11 pm UTC

Quoting: Mountain ManEngland is becoming less free by the day.

The era of the open internet is over.

Too many people have forgotten that democracy doesn't end the second you leave the voting booth during an election season. At the end of the day, this is actually our fault as citizens for letting our governments do this - and apparently we're still content to let them continue on with it.

In Canada, our MPs in parliament get paid around $200k+ a year; it used to be around $150k a year, but they've decided to give themselves a raise just because they can. During a time when $100 barely gets you anything at the grocery store and gas is $2.05 a litre, this is what our $200k a year politicians have decided to waste our time and money on. I reckon this is the exact same situation in any of the Five Eyes countries. If this doesn't make you upset, it should.

Quoting: pbThey only became interested in banning social media when they realised kids listen to influencer lies more than they listen to politician lies. Can't have any of that. 😝

Yep. They've shown that they're selective when it comes to what apps their gatekeeping is going to apply to. For the time being, Discord, Bluesky, and Roblox will not be blocked for kids under 16 in the UK. Hmm, I wonder why. Whether or not this will change, remains to be seen.

Finally some good news. Hopefully they block them for 16 and up soon as well.

I tried my best to assemble the major points, please add on any I missed.

1. It's not a social media ban, don't ever let law makers reframe it as such. It is a revocation of more of our privacy and open communication.

2. If UK lawmakers really want to protect the children, finish addressing the real world grooming/rape gangs.

While I'm not familiar with the state of the UK, I'm sure there are other situations beyond even the gangs that people would want addressed.

3. Privacy. Enforcement of these kinds of laws usually means adults providing their ID, passport, facial scan, etc. Real world info that ties their communications back to them. This allows the crackdown of dissenting opinions. Info also gets leaked, and we don't want to normalize the idea of giving personal info to websites, when the original recommendation for the internet was to never trust info to strangers.

We'll see what the specifics are in this case, but hopefully they keep the age of the account as a valid form of proof.

4. It takes autonomy away from parents. Some children have consent from their parents that know and allow their kids to use it. The government should not deny the parents' autonomy to make that choice, because even if it's questionable at times, there are legitimate cases.

5. It takes responsibility away from parents. I can't mention this point without using "you" language. They are your kids. If you don't want them on social media, control them yourself. Give them tech that physically does not support social media, like dumbphones, or impose screen time limits and restrict certain apps and websites. Parents are the ultimate authority that can manage on a personal level what their children do, far more than government ever can. They can catch their kids using their driver's license to sign up to things. If you can't manage, don't give them the devices in the first place, but regardless, the management role is still yours to fill. The rest of the internet should not have to give up their rights because you do not do your job. If someone has a dog, they should leash it and not make it everyone else's burden to pick up after it.

6. The internet is global infrastructure. People can migrate to other platforms that don't enforce these laws. There is nothing inherently wrong with decentralized and more private platforms, but many aren't so good. This can lead to...

7. Unintended consequences. Other platforms may be more radical, and expose even greater dangers since they don't follow the same standards. If you block the major porn sites for instance, more traffic is driven to ones that don't have as much vetting, and potentially host illegal stuff.

To be fair, the current state of social media is already at this point anyway, where random Instagram reels would show graphic videos (like people crushed by elephants), and AI slop also made depictions of illegal content widely available.

8. The slope. They have no idea what social media is. Australia's social media ban originally wanted to include GitHub. GitHub, the platform for developing and sharing software, is comparable to TikTok? Now that the foot is in the door, we can't really expect what they will turn their eyes to next.

9. Rules for thee. Law makers are never happy to be on the receiving end of their policies. Chat Control 1.0 would exempt politicians, and Chat Control 2.0 still proposes the same exemptions. Suffice it to say they will probably want to protect themselves to a similar extent here, even if their socials by nature already give up their info.

Curse this law, and curse the widely held lack of digital literacy!

Quoting: MrBellesCurse this law, and curse the widely held lack of digital literacy!

Damn right.

Not that everyone else living outside of the UK have any excuses for letting our politicians behave like this, but I still can't help but expect the citizens of the country that birthed George Orwell and JRR Tolkien to know better.

So the age of internet anonymity on platforms and services is coming to an end?
This sucks. I mean, implicit internet anonymity has been the bedrock on my understanding of the service ever since BBS days. You're just a number accessing a bulletin board, just any old name accessing EFnet, just a random name on ICQ. Later I began using my Steam handle everywhere, but to most everyone it's just a handle.
That may still be the case. Discord might ask for my driver's license, but if nothing else changes, I'm still just my Steam handle.
What will suck is when we inevitably are forced to reveal ourselves across the broad internet and form the link between all the services we use. Then we can be traced and profiled. I might have a unique email address for every account, but I still have to provide my DL# to all services, and if they all agree to communicate with eachother to share data...

UK Government please explain to us all what websites are considered social media and must following this law... Answer: 'Yes'

Quoting: SlaxerI find it very hard to believe that this wasn't planned by them years ago.

Meta was supposedly laying groundwork for such changes years ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_billion_in_nonprofit_grants_and_45/

It's not entirely clear this will even happen. Starmer is on his way out in the next month or two and the reception to this, even from child safety groups, has been pretty negative.

Quoting: SalvatosFinally some good news. Hopefully they block them for 16 and up soon as well.

Careful with yours wishes... this is "social" media site, by many, way to broad definitions. If talking about biggest offenders of "social" networks/media as Facebook, Twitters (X) or what ever "kids" using these days... regulation and accountability well over decade to late.

Last edited by mindedie on 16 Jun 2026 at 7:56 am UTC

Quoting: seflasporinIt's not entirely clear this will even happen. Starmer is on his way out in the next month or two and the reception to this, even from child safety groups, has been pretty negative.

It will, whoever comes after will continue it, just like the Online Safety Act.

Oh, well. Time to teach our kids how to use Tails I guess...

Quoting: Liam Squires-HandIt will, whoever comes after will continue it, just like the Online Safety Act.

The OSA had already passed under the Tories. This is still just a proposal, it hasn't been turned into an actual bill yet and when it does it still has to go through about 8 levels of government. It'd take at least 6 months to get something like this passed, likely a lot more (see the assisted dying bill) and Burnham will be in charge long before that.
I'm sure some bill will be passed eventually, but it won't be this.

just like banning kids from smoking and alcohol this is a good thing