- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
UK Bans Social Media for Those Under 16
Posted on 6/15/26 at 2:32 am
Posted on 6/15/26 at 2:32 am
quote:
Keir Starmer says under-16s will be banned from social media - watch live above as he speaks from Downing Street
"A full ban is the right choice," the prime minister says, adding "this is not something I do lightly"
TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram are among the apps that could be included
The measures are part of the government's plans to protect young people from harm online and address unhealthy late-night scrolling on phones
A consultation, which concluded earlier this year and had more than 116,000 responses, found that 85% of parents believe the risk of social media outweigh the benefits
LINK
England is truly lost.
26
Posted on 6/15/26 at 2:37 am to Aubie Spr96
I agree with it. It would never fly in the US, but I don't plan on letting my kids have social media until then.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 2:57 am to BrianKellysbuyout
Having a ban is not the problem. The problem is that they’re allowing kids to go onto Blue Sky (an X like far left platform). It’s clearly an attempt to control the political narrative with children. That’s a major issue.
This post was edited on 6/15/26 at 3:02 am
Posted on 6/15/26 at 4:06 am to BrianKellysbuyout
quote:
I agree with it. It would never fly in the US, but I don't plan on letting my kids have social media until then.
Kids are vastly different in IQ and maturity. In my HS the 14 y.o. GT kids acted like 20 y.o. adults while the 18 y.o. general phase kids acted like they were 12.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:08 am to Aubie Spr96
quote:The problem I'd have with it would be if it included an asymmetric ban where sites like x.com are included but bluesky is not. That appears not to be the case. The legislation doesn't seem to include specific names, just categorization.
UK Bans Social Media for Those Under 16
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:11 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The problem I'd have with it would be if it included an asymmetric ban where sites like x.com are included but bluesky is not. That appears not to be the case. The legislation doesn't seem to include specific names, just categorization.
Well, that is how it is, right?
Blue sky is allowed
x isn’t
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:12 am to djsdawg
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. Bluesky is absolutely full of accounts proudly calling themselves “minor attracted persons” — pedophiles.
Starmer conveniently left it off the under-16s social media ban list.
This was NEVER about protecting children.
It’s about funnelling kids to degeneracy while censoring truth.
Starmer is a disgrace.
Ban the lot. Protect our kids
quote:
Blue sky is allowed
x isn’t
This would be my guess…
This post was edited on 6/15/26 at 7:13 am
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:18 am to Aubie Spr96
Who and what do we ban next folks?
The attack is on the target
quote:
Blue sky is allowed
x isn’t
The attack is on the target
This post was edited on 6/15/26 at 7:20 am
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:24 am to djsdawg
quote:I guess we'll have to see in implementation.
Well, that is how it is, right?
I think this is the wording in the law, which does not mention specific platforms by name:
An “age-restricted social media platform” is defined as an electronic service that:
• has the sole, or a significant purpose of the service to enable online social interactions between two or more end-users;
• allows end-users to link or interact with other end-users; and
• allows end-users to post the material on the service.
This post was edited on 6/15/26 at 7:25 am
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:28 am to BrianKellysbuyout
quote:
but I don't plan on letting my kids have social media until then.
And that is the point, the choice is yours not some bureaucrats power over your personal habits.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:32 am to Placekicker
quote:
Bluesky is absolutely full of accounts proudly calling themselves “minor attracted persons” — pedophiles
Kier Starmer is Patient Zero
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:34 am to Aubie Spr96
under 16 native Saxons just have to 'identify' as mooslim terrorists - they'll get free wifi and all the access they can desire -
Posted on 6/15/26 at 7:40 am to Aubie Spr96
BlueSky, the insane radical leftwing progressive site, thats so left even lefties are taken aback, is not banned for under 16s.
This says everything about the piece of shite UK government.
This says everything about the piece of shite UK government.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:08 am to Aubie Spr96
It's not the law itself, it's the negative space around the law that's the true root of the nefarious intent. You already have to purchase a license from the state just to watch broadcast TV in England. This kind of authoritarian nonsense shouldn't surprise anyone.
It goes like this: "We want to ensure that children online are safe, so we're banning anyone under 16 from using social media. To this end, you're going to have to upload your gov't/photo ID to prove you're old enough to use it."
No one under 16 has any form of photo ID in the UK. Great for the social media Must Be This Tall to Ride, right? Now they have the photo IDs of internet users. They've proven that they'll haul UK citizens to jail for "offensive" memes. This is just giving them more Orwellian oversight over wrongthink from their own citizens.
It goes like this: "We want to ensure that children online are safe, so we're banning anyone under 16 from using social media. To this end, you're going to have to upload your gov't/photo ID to prove you're old enough to use it."
No one under 16 has any form of photo ID in the UK. Great for the social media Must Be This Tall to Ride, right? Now they have the photo IDs of internet users. They've proven that they'll haul UK citizens to jail for "offensive" memes. This is just giving them more Orwellian oversight over wrongthink from their own citizens.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:11 am to Aubie Spr96
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:19 am to Aubie Spr96
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:37 am to Aubie Spr96
Good policy. But should be handled at home.
Having said that, if we made social media companies liable for the harm they caused young people, the social media companies might figure it out.
Having said that, if we made social media companies liable for the harm they caused young people, the social media companies might figure it out.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:45 am to the808bass
“The welfare of the people is always the alibi of tyrants.”
Albert Camus
Albert Camus
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:47 am to Aubie Spr96
quote:
UK Bans Social Media for Those Under 16
I don't hate it. I'm sure it's not that simple though.
Posted on 6/15/26 at 8:53 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The problem I'd have with it would be if it included an asymmetric ban where sites like x.com are included but bluesky is not. That appears not to be the case. The legislation doesn't seem to include specific names, just categorization.
I think you're wrong about that. They haven't released specific platform names, but the effect will be the same. For example, I've read that one of the criteria is how effectively the sites remove "harmful" material. The ban will very likely end up being selective and asymmetric, IMO.
This post was edited on 6/15/26 at 9:08 am
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News