Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

United Kingdom

The U.K. Wants a Social Media Curfew for 16- and 17-Year-Olds

Tech companies may soon have to comply with yet another U.K. regulation.

Meagan O'Rourke | 7.16.2026 11:06 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Teen girl on a smart phone | Illustration: Vadymvdrobot/Envato
(Illustration: Vadymvdrobot/Envato)

The United Kingdom's crusade against social media is not over. As if a social media ban for children under 16 were not restrictive enough, the U.K. has announced plans to impose a social media curfew for 16- and 17-year-olds. 

On Wednesday, the country's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology unveiled a proposal for default overnight curfews on social media apps between midnight and 6 a.m. The measure would also, by default, switch off features that "serve up personalised content" for the older teenagers. The proposed regulations would still need to be legislated by Parliament and are expected to be enforced next spring. 

According to a press release announcing the proposals, these measures will "help ensure there is no cliff edge in protections as young people move into their later teenage years," since the country's social media ban only covers children under 16. The curfew measures are not as overtly restrictive as the ban, and 16- and 17-year-olds can opt out of the curfew by changing their account settings. Still, the measures represent another overreach of government power into young people's lives. In the U.K., 16-year-olds can consent to sex, drink alcohol in restaurants (with an adult), and join the Royal Navy. But they cannot be trusted, by default, to manage their own social media usage?

"In Scotland, at 16, you can legally move out, get married, work full time, leave education, and enlist, but can't be on your phone when you want," one teen complained to The Guardian. "I'm sorry, but that's stupid."

Others have pointed out the absurdity of the policy, which may not even achieve its stated goals. 

"Either Labour think [sic] 16 & 17 year olds should be on social media or they don't, but curfews they can switch off won't achieve anything," Laura Trott, the Shadow Education Secretary, wrote on X. "Giving 16 year olds the vote while putting them under a social media curfew makes no sense."

The U.K. is proposing other online safety measures in addition to the curfew. The country's technology secretary also intends to "bring forward a package of measures to help children use AI chatbots safely," including "regular breaks for under-18s using chatbots" (it's unclear if such breaks would be encouraged or required) and "working with regulators and across government to address services that provide dangerous, misleading or unverified mental health advice." It says that "ministers will consider all options, including banning chatbots that pose a serious threat to children." 

The U.K. government also plans to bolster "media literacy skills" in schools through an updated National Curriculum and Relationships, Sex, and Health Education classes. These classes will "teach children to navigate new types of technology including artificial intelligence and AI chatbots, identify mis- and disinformation as well as violent and misogynistic content." 

This is perhaps the most chilling part of the proposed measures. Misinformation and disinformation are extremely subjective terms that have regularly been invoked to justify censoring speech (like in the U.S. during COVID-19). Schools have a legitimate interest in teaching students to think critically and seek truth, but the U.K. government is hardly in a position to tell kids how to navigate technology as it continues to propose and implement draconian measures restricting the free flow of information online.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Thomas Massie Sparks a Democratic Civil War Over Israel

Meagan O'Rourke is an associate editor at Reason.

United KingdomSocial MediaTechnologyEnglandCellphonesTeenagersParenting
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (12)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. MWAocdoc   2 months ago

    "Tech companies may soon have to comply with yet another U.K. regulation."

    Yet another misleading subtitle. Tech companies do not "have to comply" with any UK regulations - ever. The simple solution for any international tech company to avoid compliance is to make sure that they have no valuable assets to be seized within the jurisdiction of the U.K. socialist dictatorship and ignore any legal commands from them. If the government want to punish teens and their parents for violating curfews and other tech restrictions, let them try.

    1. richardwashby   2 months ago

      Amen to that. I wish they would all follow this practice everywhere.

    2. damikesc   2 months ago

      Hell, UK is still trying to force 4chan to pay them and are trying to use US to collect the money. In spite of 4chan having zero assets in that once-great but now Muslim country.

  2. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

    They could try parenting their own kids instead of letting the government stick their noses into it. Also, the government could suddenly decide "hey, let's mind our own business." Either would work, both would be nice.

    1. MWAocdoc   2 months ago

      How dare you suggest that subjects of the crown are not in need of constant supervision by His/Her Majesty's Secret Service?!

    2. NoVaNick   2 months ago

      The UK government often assumes that the average citizen is not very intelligent, and often that is correct. However, their “social contract” dictates that the state must intervene so that subjects don’t need to live with consequences of their actions unless those consequences are punishment by the state.

  3. richardwashby   2 months ago

    Some US politicians will soon jump on this bandwagon sooner rather than later despite it's inherent idiocy.

    Coming soon to a state near you. Maybe we should replace 1984 with 2034

  4. damikesc   2 months ago

    ...OR we could pass regulations in stark opposition to the UK regulations and dare tech companies to side with us or them.

  5. NoVaNick   2 months ago

    Still not as retarded as the UKs generational tobacco ban, but close.

    Why anyone would want to live in the UK is beyond me. Shitty weather, not so attractive women, warm beer, and a government that treats its citizens as if they don’t know how to wipe their arses.

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Still not as retarded as the UKs generational tobacco ban, but close.

      I was thinking similarly about the "cliff edge". Without social media what are 16-17 yr. olds supposed to do? Go out drinking with their parents?

  6. See.More   2 months ago

    [...]Schools have a legitimate interest in teaching students to think critically and seek truth...[...]

    If you are talking about government schools indoctrination centers, they have absolutely zero interest in teaching students to think critically or seek truth. Quite the reverse. They have a vested interest in teaching students what to think and to believe, without question, authorities (see: "trust the experts"). The overwhelming social response to the states' COVID "advice," edicts, mandates, and policies demonstrated, with disturbing clarity, exactly how successful government indoctrination centers have been in creating two+ generations of people that blindly believe what "the experts" say and faithfully, even militantly, follow the dictates of their "superiors."

    The majority of the population demonstrated zero critical thinking or sought truth and rabidly turned against those that did. That is what the "schools" are interested in.

  7. Livemike   2 months ago

    " identify mis- and disinformation as well as violent and misogynistic content."
    Misandrist content also?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

'Alligator Alcatraz' Held Detainees in Small Metal Cages, Inspector General Report Finds

C.J. Ciaramella | 9.14.2026 5:15 PM

AI Executives Want International Regulation. They Could Just Slow Down Themselves.

Tosin Akintola | 9.14.2026 4:54 PM

A $95,000 Fine for Transporting a 6-Pack of Beer Defies the Eighth Amendment, a Supreme Court Brief Argues

Jacob Sullum | 9.14.2026 3:10 PM

The 'Stop Nick Shirley Act': Yet Another Anti-Doxxing Law That Chills Free Speech

Josh Pauzé | 9.14.2026 1:58 PM

Should Data Centers Go Seasteading?

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 9.14.2026 11:17 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Reason's July 4 Special!

For America's 250th, Get 2 Years of Reason for $17.76

Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.

Subscribe to Reason