Which platforms are included in the UK’s under-16s social media ban?

Blog & News
Written By Yipiyap

Author: Matthew Dagnall

Yesterday morning, Prime Minister Kier Starmer announced plans for a “world-leading” ban on social media platforms offering services to users aged 16 or under. [1]

The UK government intends to follow in the footsteps of Australia, whose “Social Media Minimum Age” Act was the first of its kind globally.

Australia’s ban, which came into force last December, requires social media companies to prevent under-16s from creating new accounts on their platforms, as well as removing any that already exist.

Besides adopting the model of a blanket ban, however, the UK government is pushing for an “Australia Plus” model, which will “go further than any other country” by restricting specific functions identified as harmful to young people.

These “Australia Plus” restrictions include livestreaming and communication with strangers and will apply to a wider ranger of online services, including gaming platforms.

The question, then, is, which platforms are in the firing line? (And does that include Peerscroller?)

Which platforms have government confirmed already?

Downing Street’s announcement specifically confirmed that the following platforms would be restricted from delivering their services to under-16s:

  • Snapchat
  • TikTok
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • X

So, we can safely assume those will fall within the scope of legislation.

Meanwhile, the Prime Minister also clarified that the following platforms are intended to be exempt from the ban:

  • Messaging services, with specific mentions of:
    • Whatsapp
    • Signal
  • Children’s services exempt under the Australian model,[2] with specific mentions of:
    • YouTube Kids
    • LEGO Play
    • Google Classroom

Beyond those few specific mentions, the fate of any other platforms remain a matter of speculation – so, let’s get speculating.

Which platforms has Australia already banned?

When asked whether the ban would “stifle access to age-appropriate experience”, the Prime Minister invoked the children’s platforms allowed under Australian legislation (such as Google Classroom).[3]

That suggests the scope of the UK ban will be more than just inspired by Australia’s model – and so, the list of platforms already banned by Australi’s eSafety Commissioner is likely a sensible place to start looking.

Australia’s age-restricted platforms include all of those explicitly outlined by Kier Starmer yesterday, as well as:

  • Reddit
  • Streaming sites Kick and Twitch
  • Facebook and Instagram developer Meta’s Twitter/X rival, Threads

In addition to those platforms identified by the Australian eSafety Commissioner, a number of services have been included on the list of age-restricted platforms following their own self-assessment:

  • Twitter/X rival, BlueSky
  • Several dating services owned by Match Group, including:
  • Match.com
    • Tinder
    • Hinge
    • OKCupid
    • Plenty of Fish
    • Azar
  • Friend-finding apps, including:
    • Yubo
    • Wizz
  • TikTok developer ByteDance’s lifestyle platform, Lemon8
  • Streaming site BigoLive

It’s also noteworthy that a number of platforms have not been classified as age-restricted social media under the Australia model, including:

  • Direct messaging platforms, including:
    • Facebook and Instagram developer Meta’s Messenger
    • WhatsApp
  • Child-focused apps, including:
    • LEGO Play
    • YouTube Kids
  • Gaming platforms (and gaming comms platforms), including:
    • Roblox
    • Steam (and Steam Chat)
    • Discord
  • Edtech platform Google Classroom
  • Lifestyle platform Pinterest
  • Code-sharing platform GitHub

What factors will determine the scope of the ban?

Besides considering those platforms already ruled on by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, we might also consider the likely definitions of the UK ban in determining which platforms will be affected.

Australia-style restrictions

This morning’s announcement explained that the Australia Plus model is intended to capture “user-to-user platforms, whose purpose is to enable social interaction and which allow users to post material, alongside algorithms.”[4]

As indicated, that definition so far does indeed fall in line with Australia’s Online Safety Act.

The amendment that introduced Australia’s ban in November 2024 defines a service as an “age-restricted social media platform” if it meets all of the following conditions:[5][6]

  • the sole purpose, or significant purpose is to enable social interaction between 2 or more end-users
  • the service allows end-users to link to, or interact with, some or all of the other end-users
  • the service allows end-users to post material on the service.

In March 2026, further rules introduced under the act added a fourth condition:[7][8]

  • the service adopts an account-based recommender feature (algorithms)...
  • and/or at least one of the following design features while users are logged in:
    • endless-feeds (infinite scroll)
    • feedback features (such as displaying the number of ‘likes’ or ‘upvotes’ a user has received)
    • time-limited features (such as disappearing ‘stories’).

Those “logged-in features” were not explicitly outlined in yesterday’s announcement, so it remains to be seen whether the UK will follow Australia in restricting infinite scroll, feedback features, and time-limited features.

Australia-style exemptions

The Australian legislation also comes with a series of exemptions.

Platforms are exempt from the ban if they are solely or primarily designed for:[9]

  • Instant messaging, email, voice calls, or video calls
  • Playing games online
  • Sharing information about products or services (such as reviews, tech support, or advice)
  • Professional networking or professional development
  • Education (including communication between settings and students or families)
  • Healthcare (including communication between healthcare providers and patients)

Based on the platforms Kier Starmer indicated would be exempt from the ban yesterday (for example, Whatsapp or Google Classroom), it seems likely that the UK will adopt a similar set of exemptions into its own legislation.

“Australia-Plus” restrictions

That covers the “Australia” half of the model – but what about the “Plus”?

In that regard, the government outlined its desire to go beyond Australia’s legislation in addressing the following:

  • Blocking livestreaming for under-16s
  • Blocking communication with strangers for under-16s
  • Restricting “romantic companion” chatbots and similar intimate functionalities on general-use AI chatbots for under-18s
  • Overnight curfews on social media use for under-18s
  • Breaks in infinite scrolling for under-18s (noteworthy in being broader but weaker than Australia’s ban on platforms with infinite scroll for under-16s)

Number 10 provided little detail on the above but indicated that further details would be set out in July.

However, as government plans to implement the ban using powers granted in this year’s earlier Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, we can find some further clues in its text.

Part 3 (Online safety etc) of the Act gives the following examples of requirements the Secretary of State may impose on online platforms:[10]

(a) limit the amount of time per day, or over the course of a specified period, for which relevant children may access the service or a specified functionality or other feature of the service;

(b) limit the times of day at which relevant children may access the service or a specified functionality or other feature of the service;

(c) restrict access by relevant children to a service or to a functionality or other feature of a service by virtue of which—

(i) a user of the service could receive unsolicited contact from a person who is not known to the user;

(ii) a user of the service could encounter live oral communications or live video generated directly on the service, or uploaded to or shared on the service, by a person who is not known to the user;

(iii) a person who is not known to a user of the service could encounter live oral communications or live video generated directly on the service, or uploaded to or shared on the service, by the user;

(iv) a person who is not known to a user of the service could identify the actual or approximate location of the user.

Here, we see the groundwork for the overnight curfews and block on communication with strangers from yesterday’s announcement.

It also provides potential clarity on what a block on livestreaming means in practice. If the actual implementation of the ban follows the examples set out in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, under-16s will likely be banned from both viewing strangers’ livestreams and broadcasting their own.

But the Act also leaves the door open for several restrictions not mentioned by in the Prime Minister’s announcement, including:

  • Time limits on social media use
  • Limitations on location sharing

What should we expect to see?

Bringing these factors together, we can take a reasonable guess at the scope of the government’s current plans for the social media ban.

In line with Australia’s model, the UK will likely implement a blanket ban on under-16s’ use of platforms that meet all of the following conditions:

  • Solely or primarily intended to connect two or more users
  • Permit users to post their own content
  • Recommends content or accounts based on an algorithm

We don’t yet know if the UK’s ban will replicate the “logged-in features” of Australia’s definition (meaning infinite scroll, feedback features, and time-limited features) or whether these will be addressed through the specific rules on potentially-harmful features (slated for further detail in July).

  • Speaking of those potentially-harmful features, we know that the government hopes to place restrictions:
  • Livestreaming (likely both viewing and broadcasting)
  • Communicating with strangers
  • “Intimate” uses of AI chatbots (like “romantic companion” chatbots)
  • Night-time use of social media platforms
  • Infinite scrolling

And, looking at the text of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, we might also add to that list:

  • Social media use time
  • Sharing location with strangers

So far, it doesn’t sound like platforms with those features will be hit with a blanket ban on use by young people but will instead be required to restrict young users’ access to those features.

Where those features are peripheral to a platform, that should be simple enough.

But where those restricted features are core to a platform’s offer, any restrictions on young user’s access to those features will be tantamount to a ban in practice. Australia’s implementation bears this out, with streaming sites Twitch and Kick making the list of age-restricted platforms.

Which platforms will be affected by the UK ban?

So, at last, we come to the real question everyone is asking: which online platforms are actually going to get banned in the UK?

As we’ve discussed, our concrete knowledge on the UK’s social media ban is still fairly limited.

But, considering the platforms that Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has already ruled on and the scope of the Australian model that the UK government hopes to adopt, we can make some educated guesses.

Social Media Giants

The giants of “traditional” social media are the simplest case: we should expect pretty much all of these to fall within the scope of the blanket ban for under-16s.

Here’s how the biggest social media platforms in the UK stack up in Australian law, and where we might expect them to fall within the UK’s plans:

Downing Street has already confirmed that Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X are all intended to be age-restricted under the new ban.

We haven’t had word yet on Reddit and Threads, but as they’re already restricted under the Australian model, we’re expecting to see the same on this side of the globe.

Among the major social platforms in the UK, LinkedIn and Pinterest sit apart as likely exemptions.

In Australia, LinkedIn is excluded from age-restriction due to the exemption on professional development services.

Likewise, Pinterest is exempt – probably as the platform’s main purpose is not social interaction.

So, we’re not currently expecting either of those sites to be age-restricted once the UK’s ban comes into force.

Messaging & Communication Platforms

Platforms primarily intended for direct communications are explicitly exempt from Australia’s ban, and the Prime Minister’s speech yesterday suggested the same would be true in the UK.

Downing Street explicitly confirmed that WhatsApp and Signal are not intended to be affected by the ban, but we’re likely to see the same outcome for other messaging platforms, including (Facebook) Messenger, iMessage, Discord, Telegram, and Microsoft Teams.

Snapchat is an interesting exemption, falling into the social media bucket in both Australia and (per yesterday’s announcement) the UK.

It will be interesting to see whether Snapchat are able to adapt their service to fall within the exemption of other messaging apps, particularly if other countries follow the UK and Australia with similar social media bans.

Video-Sharing Platforms

When it comes to video sharing platforms, Kier Starmer’s address only made specific mention of YouTube and TikTok, which are intended to be restricted. (Although YouTube’s guard-railed spinoff, YouTube Kids, was singled out as a planned exemption.)

When it comes to other video-sharing sites, Australia’s example suggests we can expect YouTube rivals like Vimeo or Dailymotion to fall in the same bucket.

Likewise, the government has indicated a desire to limit children’s access to livestreaming (as far as we can tell, likely both viewing and broadcasting).

So platforms centred around streaming (such as videogame streaming site Twitch) are likely to be banned for under-16s, as they currently are in Australia.

All of this only applies to social video sites, where the content is created by users themselves. Streaming sites like Netflix, Disney+, and Amazon Prime will be unaffected, as will broadcasters’ on-demand services, like BBC iPlayer, ITVX, and Channel4.

EdTech Platforms

Platforms primarily intended for education or communicating around education are exempt from Australia’s ban, and the Prime Minister’s mention of Google Classroom yesterday suggested the same would be true in the UK.

Although we only have confirmation on Google Classroom so far, other edtech platforms are likely to also be unaffected, including Microsoft Teams for Education, Kahoot, Century, Padlet, Moodle, Canvas, and (of course) Peerscroller.

Gaming

Like edtech, platforms which primarily function as games (as opposed to games built into social media platforms) are exempt under Australia’s model, including LEGO Play, Roblox, videogame distributor Steam (and its chat functionalities), and gaming messenger Discord.

Apart from a brief mention of LEGO Play, we haven’t had any explicit indication of where games will fall within the UK’s ban.

It certainly appears that the UK intends to follow the Australian model in most areas though, so we expect the same to be true when it comes to games. That includes games with online or social-adjacent elements, like Fortnite, Minecraft, Call of Duty, and Roblox.

That said, Roblox has recently come under fire for its failures to protect children from potential abusers.[11] While 40% of Roblox users are aged 13 or under, its decentralised user-generated content makes it difficult to moderate (in comparison to more tailored experiences built in-house by the publisher.)

This may represent a major loophole in the proposed ban – and, indeed, Roblox is under scrutiny by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, [12] despite falling into an exemption under current legislation.

It remains to be seen whether Australia will take tougher action on decentralised gaming platforms like Roblox – and it is entirely possible that the UK government will try to get ahead of the curve by addressing this type of game in its own legislation.

AI Platforms

AI platforms are not intended to be covered by the ban, although yesterday’s announcement did include plans to restrict under-18s’ access to “romantic companion” chatbots.

This restriction is slated to extend to similar “intimate” functionalities in general purpose chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Anthropic’s Claude.

Given Kier Starmer has been lobbying for a British carve-out to the White House’s recent ban on foreign use of Anthropic’s most advanced models, it’s very unlikely the UK government wants to restrict use of AI chatbots in general.

But the imprecise nature of AI could make restrictions on specific features or specific groups of users difficult to implement or enforce.

What about Peerscroller?

Although we’ve been inspired by the format of social media content, Peerscroller isn’t social media. Users can’t interact with each other, nor post their own content.

That’s not just a happy accident: we specifically built Peerscroller as an antidote to the wild west of the Internet. It’s a walled garden ecosystem, where young people and their parents can find answers to their questions about real-life, without the various pitfalls of social media.

That’s true under the current Australian laws, as well as other UK legislation, such as the Online Safety Act 2023.[13] And all signs point to it remaining true within the UK’s upcoming ban, which is expected to take effect in spring 2027.

So, rest assured: Peerscroller isn’t going anywhere.

Sources:

  1. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/social-media-to-be-banned-for-under-16s-in-landmark-government-move-to-givekids-their-childhood-back ↑

  2. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/15/keir-starmer-latest-labour-leadership-social-media-ban/#1781508979959 ↑

  3. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/15/keir-starmer-latest-labour-leadership-social-media-ban/#1781508979959 ↑

  4. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/social-media-to-be-banned-for-under-16s-in-landmark-government-move-to-givekids-their-childhood-back ↑

  5. https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2021A00076/latest/text ↑

  6. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/media-communications/internet/online-safety/social-media-minimum-age ↑

  7. https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2025L00889/latest/text ↑

  8. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/media-communications/internet/online-safety/social-media-minimum-age ↑

  9. https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2025L00889/2026-03-26/2026-03-26/text/original/epub/OEBPS/document_1/document_1.html#_Toc227396588 ↑

  10. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2026/21/part/3 ↑

  11. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78l92e9192o ↑

  12. https://www.esafety.gov.au/newsroom/media-releases/roblox-on-notice-over-ongoing-concerns-about-online-child-grooming ↑

  13. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/3 ↑

Yipiyap
Next

Resource Pack: Disability Pride Month 2026