Social media ban for under-16s "could create a game of cat and mouse" between platforms and users

The House of Lords has voted to back a ban on social media for under-16s, putting pressure on the government ahead of is own upcoming consultation on the matter.

In a similar move to Australia, which introduced its own ban for minors in December, age verification would be required to set up new social media accounts, with existing ones being deleted if users do not satisfy the requirements.

Supporters of a blanket ban claim it would eradicate harmful and innappropriate content, while critics suggest teenagers might miss out on developing vital skills in digital communication.

Dr Yusuf Oc, Senior Lecturer in Marketing at Bayes Business School, and an expert in digital consumption habits, believes greater education about the dangers of social media and child-friendly versions of platforms represent preferable alternatives.

“Social media use in adolescents is widely associated with increased risks of depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem," Dr Oc said.

"On the other hand, research also shows young people are increasingly reliant on social media for socialising, information and entertainment, wihch provide opprtunities for communicating and learning.

“An outright ban on social media for children faces both practical and strategic challenges. For instance, age restrictions are easily bypassed and can quickly create an ‘illusion of protection’. At the same time young people might miss out on fostering critical skills in navigating online risks that social media platforms present.

“Collaborating with social media companies, including development of safe, age-appropriate platforms, offers more sustainable alternatives to outright prohibition. This includes under-16 versions of TikTok, YouTube, Instagram and other channels with much tighter controls and safer defaults.

“At the same time, we need to be careful not to create a capability gap. If parents and schools do not actively teach kids how to manage attention and compulsive use, we risk raising an adult generation with entrenched addictive patterns. The solution is not to sidestep the problem at hand, but build safer environments and better habits around it that allow children to benefit from digital resources without exposure to harmful content.”

If passed as legislation, there would still need to be rigorous planning around how such a ban could be introduced and what it might look like. Dr Oc believes  lessons can be learned from Australia's own law.

“If the UK follows the Australia-style route, it is unlikely to be a total internet ban," he continued.

"Rather, a legal obligation to restrict access would sit with platforms instead of children or parents.

"In practice, this would require platforms to take robust age assurance steps at sign up and for existing accounts, including stronger age verification checks, to stop under-16s opening or maintaining accounts - building on the Online Safety Act's approach.

“A key limitation, however, is that the model mainly targets accounts, feeds, and algorithmic amplification. It does not fully prevent under-16s from seeing content that can be accessed without an account, or content shared via links or messaging.”

Early reports from Australia suggest easy workarounds are being applied to access content illegally. Citing some of these hacks, Dr Oc said it shows why the debate should not be a binary 'ban or no ban'.

“Even with robust age checks, there are obvious loopholes," he said.

“A child could be sent a YouTube link on WhatsApp, for example, be able to view it without logging in. That is not the same as having a social media account, so it sits in a grey area in an account-focused ban.

“Children could also simply use someone else’s account, like a parent, older sibling or friend. In the real world, the simplest bypass is not technical, but social.

“Any system relying on selfies or document checks will face obvious attempts to spoof or circumvent, and AI tools have made this is even easier now. Enforcement becomes a game of cat and mouse - with platforms and regulators struggling to keep one step ahead.

“The debate should not stop at ‘ban or no ban’, but with a bigger issue of forcing platforms to offer genuinely age-appropriate environments, with safer defaults and stronger content moderation for under 16s."

All comments can be attributed to Dr Yusuf Oc, Senior Lecturer in Marketing at Bayes Business School.