Want to try our resources? Sign up for our 14-Day Free Trial

Demo & Training
Business & Organisations
Terms & Conditions

Should there be a social media ban for under-16s?

23rd - 30th January 2026

Back to results

69746

Total votes

12954

5-11 votes

56792

11-16+ votes

After Australia implemented a new social media ban for under-16s, the UK Government is considering doing the same. It is essential that young people’s opinions are included in the 3-month consultation, particularly as they will be the ones most affected by its introduction. At the end of January 2026, we asked our voters to debate the topic with their peers and decide whether they think it’s the best course of action to safeguard them against potential harm. Close to 70,000 young people between the ages of 5-16+ responded; this report explores the results of the vote, and adds vital context to the reasoning behind their results.

Primary 7-11, Secondary, 16+ & College voters discussed, "Should there be a social media ban for under-16s?", while Primary 5-7 voters were asked, “Should children stop using social media?”

69,746 young people in the UK have taken part in this vote.

Respect Orders Child

Age 5-11 voter

We suggest a temporary ban until there is a better alternative as children are currently unsafe using social media and do not fully understand all of the risks involved.

Respect Orders teen

Age 11-16 voter

Social media is the new way to watch the news as we don't watch TV, so we would be isolated from what is going on in the world.

Age 16+ voter

A social media ban will not fix the root cause of the issue [but] make it more dangerous as children will find ways to get on unrestricted. It shouldn't be the users that are policed [but] the social media companies.

Feedback from our Impact Partners...

Thank you to Rani Govendor, Policy Manager for Child Safety Online at NSPCC for responding to voters on this topic!

58% of those aged 5-7 said that children should stop using social media.

  • As a social media ban for be targeted at young people, we believe it is important that they have their say on whether it's a good solution.
  • Our youngest voters, aged 5-7, were discussing the slightly scaffolded question, "should children stop using social media?"
  • Interestingly, the majority said 'Yes', which was our only 'Yes' majority for this topic.
96% of those aged 7-16+ were against a social media ban for under-16s.

  • Voters aged 7+ all discussed the question, "Should there be a social media ban for under-16s?"
  • 86% voted 'No'; whilst they showed an understanding of the dangers social media can pose to young people, they thought there were better solutions than an all-encompassing ban.
Secondary students were the most against a ban, with 90% of 11-16-year olds voting 'No'.

  • Secondary students were the most against, with 90% voting 'No', compared with 33% of both Primary 7-11-year olds, College students and those aged 16+.
  • Many said that under-16s would still find access to social media despite the ban, which would be more dangerous than their current usage.
Many said a better solution would be greater regulations, particularly for social media companies.

  • For many, the problem and solution lay with the social media companies.
  • Students argued for stricter regulations over the content that is uploaded to their platforms, particularly content that under-16s can access.
  • Others felt that parents should monitor usage, rather than the government.
results