Sir Keir Starmer's surprise move to ban social media access for under-16s has been met with severe criticism from a leading internet safety campaigner, who believes the plan undermines the Labour leader's promise to address online harms. Ian Russell, chair of the Molly Rose Foundation, is now sounding the alarm over children's online safety, arguing that a blanket ban will leave young people at continued risk and may even drive them towards unregulated apps with minimal safety features.
Mr Russell's deep concern stems from his own tragic experience: his daughter Molly took her own life after being exposed to self-harm and suicide-related material on social media. He had initially welcomed Sir Keir's commitment to strengthening regulation and tackling the harm caused by big tech, but now feels that promise has been broken. Following a recent consultation, Sir Keir had assured bereaved parents like Mr Russell that he would consider evidence before taking decisive action.
However, Mr Russell believes that instead of a robust regulatory approach, the Labour leader has opted for a policy that ignores key research and may be ineffective in addressing online harms. A report by the Molly Rose Foundation highlights how algorithms play a significant role in spreading high-risk content among teenagers, with half of girls aged 13-17 encountering such material on social media. Mr Russell argues that banning personalised algorithms for all teenagers would be a more effective measure to tackle these issues.
Mr Russell points out that Australia's experience with a similar ban for under-16s has been disappointing, with 60% of teenagers and children reportedly finding ways to circumvent the restrictions. He fears that a similar outcome will occur in the UK, leaving young people vulnerable to online harm and potentially discouraging them from seeking help due to fear of repercussions.
The campaigner warns that some may migrate to unregulated apps with minimal safety features if the major platforms are no longer incentivised to protect children. He concludes that the proposed ban offers parents 'false hope' and represents an abdication of responsibility for product safety, failing to provide a concrete plan to tackle the algorithms driving online harms.
Source: Ian Russell