Yesterday, the think tank the IPPR released YouGov polling showing that a majority of Britons, 83 per cent, believe there should be some form of restriction on social media for young people – either a blanket ban on social media for under-16s (44 per cent) or that social media companies should be forced to remove content and features that are inappropriate for children (39 per cent).
Starmer appears to have gone for a mixture of these two options, announcing in a press conference in Downing Street this morning that there will be a ‘full ban’ on social media for under-16s as well as ‘world-leading action’ on gaming services and platforms. Platforms which are intended to host material, like Snapchat and Instagram, will be banned, while messaging services like WhatsApp will not.
Interestingly the restrictions are not being limited to just under-16s. Under-18s will be banned from using romantic chatbots, meaning – somewhat farcically – there will be teenagers who can legally have sex but not send crude messages to a computer. The government will also set out plans for ‘digital curfews’ for under-18s in July to prevent infinite scrolling. So a 17-year-old could have his bedtime set by Keir Starmer later this year.
A mere 17 per cent of respondents to the poll said that they did not think social media restrictions should be applied to young people, or that they didn’t know if they should. This is a depressing outcome for those of us who believe that age-gating social media platforms is a civil liberties issue.
There are a few silver linings, however. Restrictions on social media are most popular with the ‘establishment’ parties, with 90 per cent of Labour voters, 87 per cent of Conservative voters and 92 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters saying that they support some form of restriction – compared to only 72 per cent of Reform voters and 75 per cent of Green voters.
Support is also weakest amongst people aged 18-24. Two-thirds of people in this age category support some form of ban, while 89 per cent of people aged 65 or above support one. So the young, and those who support less established parties, are slightly more sceptical about the restrictions, perhaps meaning in future they might be rolled back.
Other data from the polling shows why the public is sceptical of social media. When respondents were asked to pick three features of social media that are most harmful to young people, only 27 per cent chose algorithms and 20 per cent constant scrolling, despite these alleged harms being a central focus for campaigners.
By far the most important harm caused by social media, in the eyes of the public, is exposure to age-inappropriate content (69 per cent). When the White House attempted to pressure Starmer last week to avoid a blanket ban they suggested cracking down in a targeted way on pornographic materials instead. This is the approach that several US states including Texas have taken, requiring users of pornography sites to show their ID.
Another result from the polling that is faintly damning of the government is that the public overwhelmingly (51 per cent) pick parents as who should choose which social media platforms are appropriate for people under the age of 16. Only 15 per cent said that government ministers should be trusted – even lower than the 16 per cent of respondents who chose technology companies.
Starmer believes that he has the strong backing of the public for restrictions. He may well do, in abstract, but the implementation is bound to get messy. What he has announced is still ultimately a compromise.
Teenagers will still see nasty content on messaging services, and his ban is unlikely to protect children from being groomed by ‘Terrorgram’ or extremist groups on Discord. At the same time the compulsory uploading of ID risks private information leaking, which could prove embarrassing for fans of ‘adult services’. How many times have you had a notification telling you that one of your passwords was involved in a data leak?
Lots of things could go wrong. But they probably won’t be a problem for Starmer, who seems bound to be forced out after the Makerfield by-election on Thursday. His successor may find themself wishing that Starmer had stuck to a more manageable aim – perhaps just a crackdown on pornography – particularly if today’s 14- to 16-year-olds, who will cast their ballots in the next general election, remember the ban when they come to vote.
Comments