# The UK Announces Social Media Ban for Under-16s That’s Even More Restrictive Than Australia > Source: > Published: 2026-06-15 17:15:34+00:00 The United Kingdom is officially joining a growing list of countries worldwide that are banning teens from social media. On Monday, the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, announced that under-16s would be banned from social media platforms, following the model used in Australia. Inspired by scientific studies linking increased social media use in minors to numerous dangerous mental and even physical health outcomes, ranging from depression and anxiety to poor sleep quality, Australia became the first country in the world to ban minors from social media back in December. The landmark [Australian](https://gizmodo.com/australias-social-media-ban-is-coming-on-wednesday-heres-what-that-means-2000696594) act banned everyone under 16 from having accounts on social media platforms, including TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Snapchat, YouTube, Reddit, and Twitch. Meanwhile, messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal were spared, as were AI chatbots. Dozens of governments around the world, from Malaysia to Brazil and the European Union, have since followed suit, introducing measures of their own. While the United States is not following Australia’s example via regulation, [high-profile lawsuits](https://gizmodo.com/meta-faces-two-key-trials-that-could-change-social-media-forever-2000719673) in the past few months have held social media giants accountable for the negative impact their addictive design features have had on minors. The British ban will be the most far-reaching social media ban that’s been introduced so far. The ban will encompass all the measures in the Australian ban, while also going beyond it to restrict access to some features on online gaming and other platforms like live-streaming and chatting with strangers. The UK government will also require [AI romantic companion chatbots](https://gizmodo.com/i-went-on-a-date-with-an-ai-chatbot-heres-how-it-went-2000721484) to institute a ban on users under 18, and is looking into potential digital overnight curfews and breaks in infinite scrolling for users under 18. More details on that are to come in July. “This is about reducing harm, improving wellbeing and giving young people more time for a healthier childhood,” the UK government [shared](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fact-sheet-new-rules-to-protect-children-online/fact-sheet-new-rules-to-protect-children-online). The UK government said that the decision was made after a national consultation found that 9 in 10 parents backed a social media ban for under-16s. The survey, which the government called “one of the largest engagement exercises undertaken by this government,” also found that two-thirds of young people agreed that minors should not be allowed on some social media platforms. The government has not yet specified how the age verification will work, as the measure is yet to be introduced in Parliament. The first set of regulations will be introduced before the end of the year, with enforcement expected by Spring 2027. But the UK government did say that adults with social media accounts that have been open for more than 16 years, have a credit card connected to it, or a linked email address that has been age-verified in other ways, won’t have to go through age verification. Under existing UK law, the Online Safety Act, age verification checks are already in place for access to porn sites, often via uploading photo IDs or selfies. Adults who have already done age verification checks that way won’t need to re-verify as well. But age verification is easier said than done. Critics are wary of the growing surge of blanket social media bans, claiming that compliance will be tough. That has so far been the case in Australia, where the age verification measures have been [easily skirted](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/15/how-australia-social-media-ban-has-affected-families-six-months-on) via VPNs or shockingly simple tricks like kids [drawing a moustache on their face](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/10/world/australia/australia-social-media-ban-under-16.html) when uploading a selfie for an age-verification scan. Australia’s regulatory agency in charge of enforcing the ban [reported](https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2026-03/SocialMediaMinimumAgeComplianceUpdateMarch2026.pdf?v=1779925103131) earlier this year that seven out of 10 parents surveyed said their teens were still on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, despite the ban. In the United Kingdom as well, analysis has found that the Online Safety Act has [backfired](https://gizmodo.com/age-verification-is-driving-people-to-shadier-porn-sites-2000651884) in some cases, driving users to shadier corners of the internet instead. “They get around other laws, too, but we don’t say, ‘Oh, look, a teenager managed to get a drink somehow, so let’s not bother banning alcohol sales to children,’” Starmer told reporters on Monday, per [the New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/15/world/europe/uk-social-media-children.html). “We don’t do that, that would be utterly ridiculous, and so I just don’t accept that argument.” The UK government is instead promoting the ban as a cultural shift. While perhaps the ban could fall short of keeping every teen off social media now, it could break the [addictive grip of social media](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/24/california-ag-rob-bonta-equates-social-media-giants-to-big-tobacco-00843120) for future generations, thereby protecting them from its dangerous outcomes. “This is a line in the sand,” Starmer said in [a press release](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/social-media-to-be-banned-for-under-16s-in-landmark-government-move-to-givekids-their-childhood-back). “Tech giants had their chance and failed, but we’re stepping in to protect children, back parents, and set a new normal for future generations.”