Keir Starmer is preparing to introduce a social media curfew for teenagers as part of one of his last major acts as prime minister, with new default settings designed to limit how 16 and 17-year-olds use apps overnight.
The move sits alongside a wider package of restrictions aimed at reducing addictive scrolling and tightening safeguards around artificial intelligence. The announcement reflects growing concern in government about the impact of constant connectivity on sleep, education and wellbeing.
Under the proposals, platforms would automatically block access for older teenagers between midnight and 6am. Technology secretary Liz Kendall will set out plans to disable features that keep users engaged, including endless video reels and algorithmic feeds.
The aim is that when under-18s first join social media they are not immediately exposed to the most habit-forming tools. The social media curfew for teenagers will be voluntary in the sense that users could switch it off, but it will be on by default.
The timing comes after the government unveiled a broader UK social media ban for under-16s last month. That policy, expected from next spring, will cover platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and X, while leaving messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal unaffected. Taken together, the two measures represent the most significant attempt yet to reshape how young people interact with major apps.
Keir Starmer Online Safety Plan Targets Addictive Design
Ms Kendall said the changes respond directly to feedback from families. “Our consultation provided a clear message from parents and teenagers alike – even as young people gain greater independence at 16, they should still be protected from the most addictive online features that can have a harmful impact on their wellbeing,” she said in a statement. She added that the measures would help young people “get the sleep they need, focus on school and college, and spend more quality time with family and friends, all of which are fundamental to building a happy, healthy and fulfilling adult life.”
The government points to a pilot involving more than 300 teenagers and parents across the UK. According to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, families reported that overnight limits helped improve sleep and concentration. That evidence has been used to justify extending protections beyond younger children and into the 16 to 17 age group, a cohort often treated as adults in other areas of policy but still considered vulnerable online.
The plan also addresses artificial intelligence. New safeguards would require under-18s to take regular breaks while using chatbots. Ministers are considering a crackdown on AI services that provide “dangerous, misleading or unverified mental health advice”, with the possibility of banning chatbots deemed to pose a serious threat to children. New guidance for children, parents and guardians on safe AI use will be published, and media literacy teaching in schools will be strengthened from September.
Teenage Screen Time Limits Draw Political Pushback
Not everyone is convinced the approach will work. Critics argue that because 16 and 17-year-olds can turn off default settings, the curfew risks being symbolic rather than effective. Conservative shadow education secretary Laura Trott said: “This is another dog’s dinner from Labour. Either they think 16- and 17-year-olds should be on social media or they don’t, but curfews they can simply switch off won’t achieve anything. Giving 16-year-olds the vote while putting them under a social media curfew makes no sense.”
She also questioned the contrast between rolling out AI tutors in schools for disadvantaged pupils while warning about the dangers of chatbots. “They should stop tinkering and get on with getting under-16s off social media,” she added.
Safety campaigners welcomed parts of the package but said more is needed. NSPCC chief executive Chris Sherwood said the proposals “will go some way to improving the experiences of young people on social media – particularly having autoplay and functions that recommend content turned off by default and a curfew.” He cautioned, however, that “unless they’re followed up with further, stronger measures they will be a sticking plaster that fails to address the addictive design features which are driving high screentime and undermining children’s wellbeing.”
Colette Collins-Walsh from the 5Rights Foundation argued that bans and curfews only manage exposure. “They do nothing to incentivise change in a tech industry built on capturing children’s attention,” she said. “The government has promised children a good childhood in the digital age. That means requiring safe and age-appropriate design across all the digital products and services children use, at home, school and everything in between.”
Andy Lulham, chief operating officer at online safety provider Verifymy, highlighted the technical challenge. He said the default overnight limit “will ask the most of platforms technically, since they’ll now need to identify and apply different rules to three distinct groups – the under-16s being banned from next spring, older adolescents, and adults with full, open access.” He added that “none of this will work without robust age assurance underpinning it. A default can only do its job if a platform knows, reliably, that a user is 16 or 17.”
The announcement comes days before the Makerfield by-election, and key details will fall to incoming prime minister Andy Burnham to implement. The policy landscape is also shifting internationally. The European Union is moving to limit young children’s access to social media across the 27-member bloc in what would be its largest effort to date to guard against online harms.
When the under-16s ban was first announced, Sir Keir framed it as a choice about priorities. “How we keep kids safe online is one of the biggest debates of our time. As a dad, I know every parent wants their child to grow up safe and happy,” he said. “This is a choice about whose side we’re on: families across the country, or a status quo that isn’t working. People rightly expect action, and this government will always stand up for parents and put children first.”
Read also: Trump threatens to target Iran’s Power plants and bridges in US-Israel war on Iran
The debate now turns to enforcement and design. Platforms will have to build systems that can distinguish age groups and apply different rules without creating loopholes. Parents will have to decide whether to allow teenagers to override defaults. Schools will have to deliver new media literacy lessons while also integrating AI tools into classrooms.
Supporters say the social media curfew for teenagers is a pragmatic step that acknowledges 16 and 17-year-olds are not children, but are not yet fully independent of the pressures that come with constant notifications and infinite feeds. Critics say it risks being too soft to change behavior and too complicated to police.
What is clear is that the conversation has moved beyond whether action is needed to what kind of action will actually make a difference. With legislation, pilots, and international pressure all converging, the UK is testing whether default settings and time limits can reshape digital habits without removing access entirely.
According to reporting by The Independent, the government believes these changes will give young people more control over their time online while protecting them from the parts of social media most linked to poor sleep and low concentration.
About The Author
