Pressure is mounting on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer from within the Labour Party to implement a ban on social media access for users under the age of 16. This call to action comes despite a plea from Ian Russell, the father of Molly Russell, a teenager who tragically took her own life in 2017. Russell argues that such a ban could lead to unintended consequences for vulnerable youth.
A letter signed by 61 Labour backbench MPs, spearheaded by Fred Thomas, was sent to Starmer, urging him to consider the “clear” dangers posed by “harmful, addictive” content prevalent on social media platforms. Thomas, MP for Plymouth Moor View, emphasized the urgent need for action, stating, “We all know the harm social media causes to young people’s mental health.”
The MPs pointed out that a similar ban was recently enacted in Australia, and they warned that the UK risks falling behind as countries like Denmark, France, Norway, New Zealand, and Greece are expected to follow suit. They cited alarming statistics indicating that, in England alone, over 500 children per day are referred for anxiety treatment, and that increased social media usage is linked to rising rates of depression among young people.
In a contrasting view, Ian Russell, alongside 40 charities, campaigners, and medical professionals, has voiced strong opposition to the proposed ban. He cautioned that it may push at-risk teenagers toward unregulated online spaces, such as gaming platforms or forums that discuss self-harm. Russell, who now chairs the Molly Rose Foundation, advocates for better enforcement of existing regulations rather than “hasty, non-evidence based decisions.”
The Labour backbenchers’ letter, published by Thomas on social media, highlights the gravity of the situation. They noted that the average 12-year-old spends approximately 29 hours per week on a smartphone, much of which is dedicated to social media. This excessive screen time is linked to significant mental health issues among youths, including a doubling of depression rates in boys and a trebling in girls when their daily social media access increases from zero to five hours.
The push for a ban has garnered support from various political figures, including Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, and Wes Streeting, the current Health Secretary. Streeting’s potential rival for Labour leadership, Andy Burnham, also expressed agreement with Badenoch’s views on social media usage.
In the coming week, the House of Lords is expected to vote on a ban as part of an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is co-sponsored by prominent peers including former Conservative education minister Lord Nash and Baroness Benjamin, a former children’s television presenter.
While some view a ban as a necessary step, Russell remains apprehensive. He argues that the focus should be on holding tech companies accountable, suggesting that regulatory pressure from entities like Ofcom can prompt them to improve safety measures. He criticized the potential ban as an “ambition-led, politically-led, panic-led” initiative that could ultimately do more harm than good.
In a joint statement, over 40 charities, including the NSPCC, have echoed Russell’s concerns, asserting that blanket bans would not effectively enhance children’s safety or well-being. They worry that such measures could drive children to riskier online environments, creating a significant “cliff edge” when they turn 16 and suddenly face online pressures without prior experience.
This debate highlights the complex and multifaceted nature of social media’s impact on young people. As discussions continue, stakeholders from various sectors are weighing the potential benefits and risks of proposed regulations, with the well-being of children at the heart of the conversation.
