A weakly defined social media ban could end in very public failure
Listen to this article
Following the Government’s announcement of a social media ban for under-16s, as someone who works in age assurance, you might expect me to be cheering from the sidelines. I am not – at least, not yet.
The appetite for action is clear: the ‘Growing up in an online world’ consultation received 116,000 responses, only beaten by the responses to the equal civil marriage consultation over a decade ago. More than 4 in 5 parents said the risks of social media outweigh the benefits for their children, while 91% backed a minimum age of 16 for account holders. Ministers are right to have taken that seriously, but announcing a ban and implementing one in practice are very different things, and the wording is crucial.
When Australia introduced its landmark ban in December, platforms were required to take “reasonable steps” to keep children off their sites. Four months later, the Molly Rose Foundation found that more than three in five Australians under 16 were still active on social media.
According to research by Australian tech consultants KJR, of the ten........
