Young people should be able to enjoy the benefits of technology without being drawn into endless scrolling or disrupted sleep. That's why we're introducing new protections for 16 and 17-year-olds, including default overnight social media curfews from midnight to 6am and switching off addictive features such as autoplay and personalised recommendation feeds by default. These measures are backed by government research showing teenagers who spent less time on social media felt less stressed, slept better and were more focused at school.
And what if a child is awake late at night worrying about something? A social media curfew may reduce scrolling, but it could also leave an AI chatbot as the only ‘voice’ still available. Frying pan. Fire.
Bravo, UK! Sleep deprivation is one of the four fundamental harms of social media. Parents can't control their kids' social media use alone — the need to belong and to participate is too powerful, especially at this age. Kids love being off social media when they know everyone else is off. This way, they aren't missing out. This is a great measure that helps parents and kids, and is a meaningful step to protect the wellbeing of future generations.
Sam Butler
4d
What in the nanny state censorship is this? Children and young adults need sleep, and social media is addictive - nobody will disagree. Do we think that The Government telling our young people what time they're allowed to do things is going to do anything but breed resentment and rebellion? Were legislators never teenagers themselves? Leapt full-armed from the brow of Zeus, is it? Not to mention the huge cost to industry (who do we think is going to pick up that tab?) the unenforceability and the fact we already know savvy teens will simply work around the restriction. Utterly pointless waste of time.
As different countries experiment with interventions to address widespread concerns about online harms, our members deliver the foundational information required for any such policy - what age-range does this user fall within. The research underpinning the UK's policy announcements backs what we found in Australia - highly effective age assurance can work if it is deployed in good faith. And it is not "circumvention" if there is only a tick box to evade - that is not age assurance technology, it is was our tech was designed to replace. We also welcome the sensible decision on VPNs. An IP address is only one, increasingly unreliable, indicator of a user's location. There are plenty more ways to flag users who are likely to be underage in a regulated jurisdiction.
Really inspired by this action 🙌👏🏻… .
Simon H King FLS this a first step in the right direction, and finally implementing measures that bring our children's wellbeing before profits for the world's trillionaire.
Thoughtful safeguards can help young people enjoy technology while supporting healthier digital habits and wellbeing.
Calling this a “curfew” is disturbing. There is a real problem with addictive design. Switch off autoplay and endless feeds by default. Fine. But do not confuse fixing harmful features with controlling when people can use a lawful service. Many autistic and ADHD teenagers do not have typical sleep patterns. Some are awake late because their body clocks work differently, not because social media caused it. They should not have a government-approved bedtime imposed on them for failing to fit the norm. Then there is age checking. Adults may also be pushed into proving or estimating their age through identity data, account history or facial analysis. The Information Commissioner's Office ICO should be challenging that expansion of data collection, not endorsing it. Fix the design. Do not build a system of curfews, identity checks and surveillance around everyone.