Close Menu
    Trending
    • Negotiations that enable Israel’s land-grabs | Israel-Palestine conflict
    • True-or-false for Round 1 of 2026 NFL Draft: Will Cowboys regret their trade?
    • Opinion | Stewart Brand, Silicon Valley’s Favorite Prophet, on Life’s Most Important Principle
    • Struggling to scale your company? Here are five things that could be holding you back
    • What happens if you’re hit by a primordial black hole?
    • When is London Marathon 2026? Start time and how to watch race for FREE
    • Pentagon Requests $54 Billion For AI War
    • Clavicular Hit With New YouTube Crackdown
    Benjamin Franklin Institute
    Friday, April 24
    • Home
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Science
    • Technology
    • Arts & Entertainment
    • International
    Benjamin Franklin Institute
    Home»Technology»Use film-style age ratings to limit teens’ social media, say Lib Dems
    Technology

    Use film-style age ratings to limit teens’ social media, say Lib Dems

    Team_Benjamin Franklin InstituteBy Team_Benjamin Franklin InstituteJanuary 16, 2026No Comments4 Mins Read
    Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
    Share
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link


    The Liberal Democrats have proposed introducing film-style age ratings to limit which social media apps children can access.

    Under the party’s plan, platforms that use addictive algorithmic feeds or host “inappropriate content” would be restricted to users over 16 years old, while sites with “graphic violence or pornography” would be rated 18-plus.

    This approach, the Lib Dems have argued, would “avoid the unintended consequences” of banning all under-16s from using social media, as advocated by the Conservatives.

    In recent days, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he is open to the idea of an outright ban, telling reporters that “all options are on the table”.

    He said he would be watching to see how a ban recently introduced in Australia was working.

    The new Australian law, which came into force in December, requires certain social media companies including Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, X and TikTok to take “reasonable steps” to keep children off their platforms.

    In order to ascertain a user’s age, the companies can use government-issued identity documents, face or voice recognition or analyse online behaviour to estimate a person’s age.

    The Conservatives have said that, if elected, they would follow the same approach as the Australian government and ban under-16s from accessing social media.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: “The internet is a Wild West, social media in particular, we don’t want children to be on there.”

    However, Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrats’ science and technology spokesperson, said the proposal for a “blanket ban” was a “blunt instrument that doesn’t work in a digital age”. She said it showed Conservatives “just don’t trust parents”.

    The Liberal Democrats have argued that their “tailored approach” would allow governments to “quickly categorise” newly-emerging social media platforms based on the addictiveness or harmfulness of their content.

    Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said: “Our message to social media giants is clear: if your platform spreads harmful content or relies on addictive and harmful algorithms, you should not be allowed anywhere near our children.

    “This issue cannot be kicked down the road any longer.”

    The party says that under its proposal, apps such as TikTok, Instagram and Facebook would be classified as unsuitable for under-16s “unless these companies fundamentally rewrite their code to remove addictive algorithmic feeds and inappropriate content”.

    The age ratings would be enforced by media regulator Ofcom, who could issue fines for companies that do not comply.

    Peers in the House of Lords could get a chance to vote on the proposal next week, when the Liberal Democrats seek to add it as an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.

    During the same debate, a group of cross-party peers will push a different amendment which would prevent under-16s from accessing social media.

    It has been tabled by Lord Nash, a Conservative former education minister, but is jointly-sponsored by Baroness Benjamin, the Liberal Democrat peer and former children’s TV presenter; the Labour peer Baroness Berger and Baroness Cass, an independent member of the House of Lords, who is a paediatrician.

    Those involved in the amendment are optimistic it will pass.

    The NSPCC (National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) has urged peers to oppose a total ban saying “action is needed but a complex problem requires more than a blanket solution. Bans are not the answer.”

    The charity is backing the “film ratings” approach, arguing that children and young people should be protected but not “shut out from the online world and the benefits it can offer for connection, fun, learning and support”.

    The Molly Rose Foundation – set up in memory of Molly Russell who took her own life at the age of 14 after being exposed to images of self harm and suicide on social media – has also expressed concerns about a social media ban.

    The charity has warned of “unintended consequences” including “pushing harm to unregulated areas”.

    Some social media companies have argued that a ban would be difficult to implement and easy for users to circumvent.

    Apps such as TikTok and Instagram generally restrict accounts to those aged 13 or over.

    Some of the big platforms also put in place protections for teenagers.

    For example, teen accounts on Snapchat are private by default and public accounts are only available to those who are 16 or over.

    Snapchat has said it will comply with the ban in Australia but warned that “disconnecting teens from their friends and family doesn’t make them safer – it may push them to less safe, less private messaging apps”.



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link

    Related Posts

    Technology

    How This Former Roboticist’s Students Rebuilt ENIAC

    April 23, 2026
    Technology

    How AI Is Changing Cybersecurity

    April 23, 2026
    Technology

    Ham Radio Brings Teletext Back to Life

    April 22, 2026
    Technology

    Energy in Motion: Unlocking the Interconnected Grid of Tomorrow

    April 22, 2026
    Technology

    Tech Life – A hologram to remember: Pam and Bill’s love story

    April 21, 2026
    Technology

    Engineering Manager Vs IC: How to Choose With Clarity

    April 21, 2026
    Editors Picks

    New report sheds light on Chiefs TE Travis Kelce’s future

    December 29, 2025

    The rise, the fall and the rebound of cyclic cosmology

    April 17, 2026

    Commentary: Israel’s 1981 attack on Iraqi nuclear reactor only fuelled Saddam Hussein’s desire for nukes

    June 25, 2025

    What Israel’s attack on Iran means for the future of war | Israel-Iran conflict

    July 1, 2025

    This car company just patented a toilet under your seat

    April 18, 2026
    About Us
    About Us

    Welcome to Benjamin Franklin Institute, your premier destination for insightful, engaging, and diverse Political News and Opinions.

    The Benjamin Franklin Institute supports free speech, the U.S. Constitution and political candidates and organizations that promote and protect both of these important features of the American Experiment.

    We are passionate about delivering high-quality, accurate, and engaging content that resonates with our readers. Sign up for our text alerts and email newsletter to stay informed.

    Latest Posts

    Negotiations that enable Israel’s land-grabs | Israel-Palestine conflict

    April 24, 2026

    True-or-false for Round 1 of 2026 NFL Draft: Will Cowboys regret their trade?

    April 24, 2026

    Opinion | Stewart Brand, Silicon Valley’s Favorite Prophet, on Life’s Most Important Principle

    April 24, 2026

    Subscribe for Updates

    Stay informed by signing up for our free news alerts.

    Paid for by the Benjamin Franklin Institute. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
    • Privacy Policy
    • About us
    • Contact us

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.