Scotland’s Children’s Commissioner: Social media ban 'risks driving children to darker places on the internet'

Nicola Killean said the available evidence does not show a blanket ban will make children safer online.

She spoke out after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said his government was “giving children their childhoods back” by acting on the issue.

Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X are among the platforms affected by the move, which is expected to come into force by spring 2027.

The Scottish government welcomed the announcement but stressed “more clarity is needed on what these proposals actually mean in practice”.

READ MORE: I watched the Scotland game in an Irish bar in Boston - here's what happened

It comes amid concerns that social media can be unsafe for youngsters, is making children miserable and potentially causing lasting damage to their mental health.

While the Prime Minister acknowledged some youngsters will try to try to find their way around the ban, he insisted he would not compromise on the “safety and happiness of our children”.

Restrictions are now expected to be passed by Christmas and in place by spring next year, which will leave technology firms, rather than children, liable for enforcement action if they fail to comply.

There will also be measures to prevent children from chatting with adults on gaming and livestreaming platforms.

Hannah Oertel, of Edinburgh, the founder of the campaign group Delay Smartphones, which has long campaigned for a ban on the devices in schools, warned that children are being routinely exposed to violent, pornographic, and harmful content.

Her own daughter, while attending choir practice aged just nine, was shown a graphic video of a man being beheaded.

Ms Oertel said she was “very grateful” to learn of the prime minister’s announcement, and stressed that although the measures announced were not “perfect,” they would help protect most children.

Ms Oertel said that children have been “guinea pigs in the biggest social experiment on record,” and said social media on smartphones has caused a “mental health crisis” amongst young people.

“Finally the government has listened to parents, 90 per cent said they wanted a ban in the recent consultation,” she told The Scotsman. “This is very long overdue and while it won’t be perfect, the majority of children will be protected from online harms in a way that we haven’t seen before.”

Children’s charity the NSPCC described the measures as “a win for children and parents and all of us who have campaigned for better child protection online”.

But Ms Killean, Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, said she was “disappointed” with the UK government’s stance, adding that children may be less likely to speak out if they do see harmful content online.

The Commissioner said the Prime Minister’s statement “spoke to adults only, not to the children and young people who will be most affected by these decisions”.

A children’s rights impact assessment carried out by the Commissioner’s office “found a social media ban for under-16s would not currently be a proportionate, effective, or enforceable way to protect children’s rights”, she said.

Ms Killean continued: “Today’s announcement leaves more questions than answers. We know when a ban will happen, but not how or what it will include. The UK government must urgently address children and young people directly.”

The social media ban follows a similar move in Australia, where there has been criticism about the way it is enforced, with some youngsters making use of virtual private networks (VPNs) and other methods to get around it.

The Government intends to use highly-effective age assurance (HEAA) measures to make it more difficult for children to dodge the ban.

Those methods could include facial age estimates, photo ID or bank checks according to guidance from regulator Ofcom.

Ms Killean added: “With the evidence from Australia showing that the majority of children are still on social media, children need to know that they can report harmful content without repercussions. They must not feel they are to blame and are doing something wrong.

“There is a real risk now that children will be driven to darker places on the internet and stop talking to adults about what they might see.”

The Commissioner accepted that “evidence shows that social media can expose children to serious risks, including harmful content, cyberbullying, manipulation, contact from strangers, exploitation and excessive use”.

But she added: “It also shows that social media can play an important role in many children’s lives by supporting communication, self-expression, access to information, participation, play, and connection with communities and support networks.

“The available evidence does not currently show a blanket ban would make children safer online, and it may inadvertently push children to less regulated or riskier parts of the internet.”

She said some youngsters – such as those living in rural areas, those with family overseas, those who are disabled and those who rely on online spaces for support – will be “particularly affected” by the ban.

Siobhian Brown, the SNP minister for children and young people, said: “We have consistently called on the UK government to go further and act faster on online safety and I welcome the move to restrict social media services to under-16s.

“However, more clarity is needed on what these proposals actually mean in practice, and these cannot be rushed through without a clear plan for actually holding social media companies accountable for their failures to protect children.

“Scottish ministers have been clear that social media companies have a fundamental responsibility to enforce their own policies on harmful content, and the UK government must now set out how Ofcom will use its full regulatory powers to enforce change. I am keen to see a bold plan that goes further than what we’ve heard so far, including for example introducing a social media levy on firms.”

Mary Glasgow, chief executive of the charity Children First, said the announcement was “a welcome indication of the desire to protect children in the face of a national childhood emergency”.

She added: “The intention of both the UK and Scottish governments to reset the digital culture that is causing widespread harm to children and childhood is clear. It must now be matched with the resource and determination needed to realise it.

“Given children are likely to find ways around a ban, they will continue to be harmed unless tech companies are forced to implement changes to ensure their products are safe from the start.

“Bans on social media and smartphones in schools can begin to shift cultural norms, but they will not fix a system designed to maximise profit and ignore protection.

“The tech companies have addicted us all and we cannot expect children to change their behaviour, if the adults around them don't.”

Conservative MSP Meghan Gallacher said the Prime Minister had “finally woken up to the fact that most people want rules that protect children from unsuitable content, but we’ve yet to see whether he has any workable plan for safeguards that do that without imposing unacceptable limits on freedom of information for adults”.

Reform MSP Angela Ross said the plan “goes nowhere near far enough in tackling the real harms online and risks creating a backdoor route to Digital ID for every law-abiding citizen”.

Green MSP Laura Moodie said the ban missed the real issue.

“The danger is not that young people have social media accounts, it is that platforms are flooded with harmful content, misinformation and algorithms designed to maximise engagement at any cost,” she said. “None of that magically disappears when someone turns 16.

“This proposal risks creating a digital cliff edge. People do not suddenly become digitally literate on their 16th birthday. Instead, we should be teaching everyone how to navigate online spaces safely while making those spaces safer in the first place.”

She added: “The focus should be on fixing social media, not just fencing children out of it.”