Labour's proposed social media curfews for 16 and 17-year-olds are facing substantial skepticism, with a new survey indicating that nearly eight in ten teenagers would opt out of the restrictions. The plans, announced last month, aimed to implement default overnight curfews on social media apps from midnight to 6 a.m. and deactivate features considered addictive, such as autoplay videos, algorithmic recommendation feeds, and infinite scrolling.
However, it emerged that young people would have the ability to change their own settings, allowing them to opt out of both the curfews and the deactivation of addictive features. The survey, conducted by Censuswide, found that 79% of 17-year-olds and 72% of 16-year-olds admitted they would choose to bypass these regulations. Among 17-year-old respondents, 32% stated they would opt out to watch more online content at night, while 43% cited the need to message or call family or friends. Similar reasons were given by 16-year-old respondents, with 32% wanting to access more content and 35% wanting to communicate with others.
The survey also revealed insights into current social media usage patterns among teenagers. Less than 10% of 16 and 17-year-olds reported stopping social media use before 9 p.m. on a typical school night. A significant portion, 40%, continue scrolling until 11 p.m., with over a quarter staying online until 1 a.m., and more than 10% continuing past 1 a.m.
Critics argue that these findings demonstrate the inadequacy of the proposed reforms in protecting young people from online harms. Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, described the curfew announcement as "piecemeal and poorly thought out." He urged for a more comprehensive plan to ensure children's safety online while allowing them to benefit from technology.
Conservative MP Neil O'Brien echoed these sentiments, stating that "voluntary rules are the ones nobody follows." He proposed restricting social media access to individuals over 16 and placing legal duties on companies rather than children. Liberal Democrat MP Martin Wrigley suggested that social media companies should be held responsible as publishers for the content they promote.
Labour's initial proposal in June included a ban on social media for children under 16 across major platforms. The subsequent curfew plan for older teenagers was presented as a way to prevent a "cliff edge" in access. However, campaign groups had previously warned that the measures would be ineffective if teenagers could easily switch them off, raising concerns about exposure to harmful content, such as material related to suicide, late at night.
Leanne Proctor of the Online Responsibility Network, which commissioned the poll, indicated that the research suggests a curfew alone is "unlikely to be enough on its own to prevent online harms." A government spokesperson stated that young people would have a choice in navigating social media and that national polling showed 64% of 16 to 21-year-olds supported restricting children from certain apps at night. Trials, they added, found overnight curfews quickly became part of daily routines and helped improve sleep and concentration, while still providing 16 and 17-year-olds the ability to make informed decisions about protections that fit their circumstances.