A rushed ban on social media for under-16s in the UK could ‘unravel’ and leave families to count the cost, the Molly Rose Foundation (MRF) has warned. The charity, founded by the family of teenager Molly Russell who took her own life after viewing harmful online content, said an age limit would fail to make children safer as they would circumvent age checks and move to less regulated areas such as gaming.
Andy Burrows, MRF chief executive, said a ‘rushed’ ban was not supported by evidence. “If Keir Starmer prioritises short-term announcements over what the evidence and experts say is needed, children and parents will be left to count the cost and child protection will take a step back,” he said. The Times reported that the government plans to announce a ban before the Makerfield byelection on 18 June.
The MRF said the government should instead set strict safety standards for apps, such as curbing personalised algorithms, and only ban apps that fail to meet those requirements. This differs from the government’s proposed ‘harmful’ ban policy. A government consultation on children’s online safety, including a potential under-16 ban, closed only last week.
Crossbench peer Beeban Kidron criticised the reported proposal as a ‘non-ban ban’, accusing ministers of soft-pedalling safety measures after giving Apple and Google a three-month deadline to install anti-nudity software on smartphones. Labour MP Fred Thomas backed bold action but noted the need for agility as platforms change rapidly. However, some Labour MPs expressed frustration, with one saying, “They should get on with it, to be honest.”
A government spokesperson said: “We’ve been clear we are determined to act quickly, but we will do so in a way that is effective, enforceable and genuinely keeps children safe.” The government also consults on age restrictions for features like infinite scrolling and limitations on AI chatbots.
