Do not ban social media for under 16s
60,226 people across UK responded, 100% favour. Most significant reasons: Screen time hurts concentration and More screen time reduces focus. Most mentioned reasons for and against are around: social media benefits and screen time effects.
React
Where do you stand on this motion?
See what others are saying
Members can read every reason.
Similar motions
Ban social media for under-16s to protect children
Ban social media access for under-16s. We think this could protect their mental health and childhood. Evidence shows it can cause harm, exposing children to bullying, addiction and inappropriate content. Follow Australia’s lead to prioritise their well-being. Social media can wait—childhood cannot.
Government ban on social media to be for under 13s only
Any government ban on social media that is introduced should be for under 13s only. We want people 13+ to be able to use social media. Not just 16+, as we believe 13 is reasonable as you are officially a teen and responsible for yourself.
Ban all convicted child sex offenders from using social media
I would like the government to introduce a law that prevents all convicted child sex offenders from using social media. It’s been proved time and time again that social media is used by paedophiles to target and groom vulnerable children.
Ban images and videos of children under 13 being shared online
Young children cannot consent to their image being shared. Yet parents sometimes share images of their children, building their digital footprint. This could make them vulnerable to abuse.
Do not ban children from using virtual private networks
We call upon the UK Government to reject any calls or lobbying that propose to restrict or ban the use of virtual private networks ("VPNs") for children, because of the impact this would have on other VPN users.
Do not ban social media for under 16s
60,226 people across UK responded, 100% favour. Most significant reasons: Screen time hurts concentration and More screen time reduces focus. Most mentioned reasons for and against are around: social media benefits and screen time effects.
React
Where do you stand on this motion?
See what others are saying
Members can read every reason.
Similar motions
Ban social media for under-16s to protect children
Ban social media access for under-16s. We think this could protect their mental health and childhood. Evidence shows it can cause harm, exposing children to bullying, addiction and inappropriate content. Follow Australia’s lead to prioritise their well-being. Social media can wait—childhood cannot.
Government ban on social media to be for under 13s only
Any government ban on social media that is introduced should be for under 13s only. We want people 13+ to be able to use social media. Not just 16+, as we believe 13 is reasonable as you are officially a teen and responsible for yourself.
Ban all convicted child sex offenders from using social media
I would like the government to introduce a law that prevents all convicted child sex offenders from using social media. It’s been proved time and time again that social media is used by paedophiles to target and groom vulnerable children.
Ban images and videos of children under 13 being shared online
Young children cannot consent to their image being shared. Yet parents sometimes share images of their children, building their digital footprint. This could make them vulnerable to abuse.
Do not ban children from using virtual private networks
We call upon the UK Government to reject any calls or lobbying that propose to restrict or ban the use of virtual private networks ("VPNs") for children, because of the impact this would have on other VPN users.