Social media ban for under-16s in UK and action on gaming services and live streaming platforms

[itskdog]

1 hour ago, Davit2005 said:

over 16s won't be blocked.

 

Over 16s who value their privacy will be affected as they will be blocked by the ID verification that they refuse to comply with.

 

YouTube should hopefully be able to trust that my personal account is 18 due to my account age (made it as an early teenager), having had a debit card on file (and paying YT Premium) for 2+ years (as you have to be 16 to have a debit card, Newgrounds used that method for the OSA the other year - any CC, or a debit card on file for 2 years), and general other behaviour with my web habits, Google Pay usage, etc.

[David44]

2 hours ago, Davit2005 said:

They probably will but over 16s won't be blocked.

 

 

Everyone accessing YouTube from a UK IP address will be blocked by default. There are steps one can take to circumnavigate the block, VPN, age verification, signing in to a Google account etc. but if you don't take any of those steps, you will be blocked, whatever age you are.

[DrCheese]

Yes, I will not comply with giving my ID to access services. It's a *massive* overreach of state control dressed up as protecting children.

I don't care what safeguards they pretend to come up with, it *will* be abused & harm free speech. Data will leak, like it already has.

 

It's quite difficult for me to avoid getting super political about this... (Which is banned on here :P)

 

Unsure what this means for us tho - Will we will be able to mark all Adult GSuite accounts as over 16 to access YouTube, to show videos that aren't set as Youtube Kids, but are educationally relevant?

 

I can see a massive pushback if staff had to do it for themselves.

 

 

 

Edited June 16 by DrCheese

[Joeloman]

This was written by Smoothwall yesterday.
https://smoothwall.com/resources/tim-levy-uk-social-media-ban

 

We have the same debate in Sweden, where there will probably also be a ban.
Many believe that this will mean that children will seek out other platforms where there is no control whatsoever.

[STK91]

48 minutes ago, DrCheese said:

Yes, I will not comply with giving my ID to access services. It's a *massive* overreach of state control dressed up as protecting children.

I don't care what safeguards they pretend to come up with, it *will* be abused & harm free speech. Data will leak, like it already has.

 

It's quite difficult for me to avoid getting super political about this... (Which is banned on here :P)

 

Unsure what this means for us tho - Will we will be able to mark all Adult GSuite accounts as over 16 to access YouTube, to show videos that aren't set as Youtube Kids, but are educationally relevant?

 

I can see a massive pushback if staff had to do it for themselves.

 

 

 

I share the same thoughts as you.

Edited June 16 by STK91

[Arthur]

6 hours ago, Davit2005 said:

One thing I have to concern with is where this ID will be collected, will it be more secure than some third party somewhere that can sell this data on or misuse it.

 

It looks like the OS manufacturers will be forced to do the initial age checks.

 

Apple and Google to be forced to check ID over social media ban (Paywalled Link)

 

Quote

Apple and Google will be forced to carry out age checks on children using their phones under plans being drawn up by ministers after Sir Keir Starmer announced a ban on social media for under-16s.

The prime minister said the ban, which will be implemented early next year, would make children “happier and safer”.

Children will be blocked from accessing the largest social media platforms, including Snapchat, YouTube and TikTok, although those deemed less “risky” such as WhatsApp and Pinterest would still be allowed.

 

Ministers are understood to have ruled out age verification being carried out by device manufacturers over concerns of the impact on global supply chains.

They are thought to prefer the operating system route as it reduces the need to repeat checks and means that sensitive data is stored in one place.

 

These checks would happen at the point that a user sets up their new phone rather than when they create an account with a social media company.

“We definitely see a world in which that makes it easier and simpler for users to age assure,” a senior government official said. “It probably won’t always be the only method, but it certainly offers opportunities that we’re really interested in.”

The approach is opposed by Apple and Google, who are worried about holding legal responsibility for age checks and do not want to collect and distribute the ages of its users at scale because of the privacy risks.

The government recently gave the two companies a three-month ultimatum to come up with a plan to stop children seeing nude imagery on their devices, which would also require age checks.

 

Apple has started to age check users in the UK who have downloaded the latest version of its operating system, and Google checks the ages of users if it detects their behaviour is not aligned with the age they have declared on their Android profile.

A tech industry source predicted that there was “still going to be a bit of a tussle” between Google and Apple on one side against Meta, which has been pushing for age checks to be done at the operating system level. The source said that Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, should not be “absolved of responsibility” and warned ministers that “device level age checks are not the panacea you think they are”.

 

[...]

 

Social media such as YouTube Kids, Lego Play and Google Classroom will be outside the scope of the ban. Starmer said those examples were “obviously the other side of the line, they don’t have the features that are concerned here”. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal will also be exempt, as will educational services, e-commerce platforms and music streaming.

 

[nicholab]

Why could some kind of KISIE-type approved filter requirement be set up for under 16's devices?  I.E. we have a number of standards for filtering that are set by the Government and one of those must be installed.  I would really like a Smoothwall-type filter for my child's device, but it is not available.

[Joeloman]

5 minutes ago, nicholab said:

Why could some kind of KISIE-type approved filter requirement be set up for under 16's devices?  I.E. we have a number of standards for filtering that are set by the Government and one of those must be installed.  I would really like a Smoothwall-type filter for my child's device, but it is not available.

In the same group as Smoothwall, there is Qustodio, which does parental control.

Is one of the best on the market and will probably build on the same content filter that Smoothwall uses in a few years.
https://www.qustodio.com/en/

 

[itskdog]

9 minutes ago, nicholab said:

Why could some kind of KISIE-type approved filter requirement be set up for under 16's devices?  I.E. we have a number of standards for filtering that are set by the Government and one of those must be installed.  I would really like a Smoothwall-type filter for my child's device, but it is not available.

 

David Cameron already did that back in 2013 at the ISP level.

Edited June 17 by itskdog

[nicholab]

3 minutes ago, itskdog said:

 

David Cameron already did that back in 2013 at the ISP level.

That is useless as it can't do decryption.

[3s-gtech]

Slow clap for the WJEC who built their new SoWs around Youtube clips.

[synaesthesia]

Am I underthinking here though, blocking comments from youtube has been achievable with most filtering system since the dark ages and am I remembering correctly you can do it with a DNS entry also?

 

[timbo343]

Computerphile have a brief explanation on how this could work (https://youtu.be/2jJeSgO_MGo) and I too think the responsibility is going to be at the Social Media side. I mean Apple have already set a president with age verification on a device needing a credit card to prove the end users age. Maybe this is something that could be rolled out but at the same time circumvented. 

[tom_newton]

56 minutes ago, nicholab said:

Why could some kind of KISIE-type approved filter requirement be set up for under 16's devices?  I.E. we have a number of standards for filtering that are set by the Government and one of those must be installed.  I would really like a Smoothwall-type filter for my child's device, but it is not available.

 

As Joel said - we do have our parental control functionality through the Qustodio brand. Happy to chat about it - send a DM!

[JazzFlute]

As a Microsoft school without Google Workspace, I assume that once this policy comes into effect, a staff Google account will be required to access YouTube.

 

Would individual staff members need to complete age verification themselves, or would these accounts be recognised as adult accounts and automatically verified? If individual verification is required, I would be uncomfortable asking staff to provide personal information for this purpose. Data breaches occur regularly, even with large companies, and Google would not necessarily be exempt—particularly if this creates a new target for hackers.

 

I did attempt to set up Google Workspace for the school some time ago. However, as our domain was previously registered over a decade ago by someone else, I was unable to complete the setup. Despite multiple support calls and emails, the issue wasn’t resolved, and the support experience was disappointing.

 

In preparation for these potential changes, I plan to try again to set up Google Workspace so that we at least have the option to create managed staff accounts if needed.

I assume that staff showing videos to pupils under 16 would still be allowed in principle, but the practical access arrangements are currently unclear.

 

EDIT:

Copilot answer below, without more technical guidance it seems its up in the air whether you will need a Google account or not.  Hopefully the government will explain sooner rather than later so everyone without a Google account/workspace can plan better and be ready.

 

Copilot

 

Short answer: probably yes, you’ll still be able to use YouTube in school, but it’s not guaranteed you’ll be able to do it without signing in—and the exact rules haven’t been confirmed yet.

Here’s the situation as it stands:

---

✅ What we know so far

• The UK plans to ban under‑16s from using major social media platforms, including YouTube, from around Spring 2027. [gov.uk], [time.com]
• This ban is aimed at children’s accounts and access, not at adults such as teachers. [gov.uk]
• Platforms will be required to introduce strong age‑verification systems (e.g. ID, facial estimation, etc.) for users. [bleepingcomputer.com]

---

👍 What this likely means for you as a teacher

• You (as an adult) should still be allowed to use YouTube.
• Showing videos for teaching purposes is unlikely to be banned in principle.
• There may even be educational exemptions or workarounds, but these haven’t been fully defined yet.

---

⚠️ The key uncertainty (important for schools)

What isn’t clear yet is how access will technically work:

1. Access without signing in

• Currently, you can watch most YouTube videos without logging in.
• In future, platforms may:
  • Require sign‑in to prove you’re over 16, or
  • Only require verification for restricted or flagged content

👉 This part has not been confirmed yet.

2. Age verification for staff

• If sign‑in becomes required:
  • You may need a verified Google account
  • Verification could involve ID, credit card, or AI age estimation [redact.dev]

3. Impact on classrooms

• Potential issues schools could face:
  • Embedded YouTube videos breaking
  • Needing shared/managed staff accounts
  • Restrictions from school filtering/safeguarding policies

---

✅ Things that are clearer

• YouTube Kids is expected to remain accessible and is not included in the ban. [time.com]
• The law is focused on protecting children, not stopping adults accessing content. [gov.uk]
• The government has said children will still be able to access online learning resources, though it hasn’t explained how that applies to YouTube specifically. [gov.uk]

---

✅ Bottom line

• Yes – you will almost certainly still be able to show YouTube videos as a teacher.
• But – you may not be able to do it anonymously:
  • You might need to sign in
  • You might need a verified account

---

💡 Practical advice (for now)

• Start thinking about:
  • Backup video platforms (e.g. BBC Bitesize, Oak National Academy)
  • Downloading or embedding videos differently
  • Testing YouTube Kids for younger learners

Edited June 17 by JazzFlute

[itskdog]

11 minutes ago, JazzFlute said:

 

As a Microsoft school without Google Workspace, I assume that once this policy comes into effect, a staff Google account will be required to access YouTube.

 

Would individual staff members need to complete age verification themselves, or would these accounts be recognised as adult accounts and automatically verified? If individual verification is required, I would be uncomfortable asking staff to provide personal information for this purpose. Data breaches occur regularly, even with large companies, and Google would not necessarily be exempt—particularly if this creates a new target for hackers.

 

I did attempt to set up Google Workspace for the school some time ago. However, as our domain was previously registered over a decade ago by someone else, I was unable to complete the setup. Despite multiple support calls and emails, the issue wasn’t resolved, and the support experience was disappointing.

 

In preparation for these potential changes, I plan to try again to set up Google Workspace so that we at least have the option to create managed staff accounts if needed.

I assume that staff showing videos to pupils under 16 would still be allowed in principle, but the practical access arrangements are currently unclear.

 

We're another Microsoft school, though we already set up a Workspace tenant previously to allow us to approve restricted videos, such as the ones used in the online Prevent training.

 

In case you weren't aware, you can federate Google with Entra, so staff just have to enter their email address and SSO should take care of the rest. We don't have that set up yet, but might find ourselves doing this soon depending on implementaton.

 

[jthompson]

On 16/06/2026 at 09:08, nicholab said:

Also should schools be then putting content on social media?

Nope. Social media industry is akin to tobacco industry IMHO. Schools shouldn't be anywhere near it.

Realities of competing for getting bums on school seats will probably override the ethical ickiness for many, though.

 

WRT YouTube and classroom use for under-16s, we do pretty well with filtering. Comments, autoplay and suggested videos can all be killed off by filtering, with available videos limited to Google's 'Education' categorisation and Worskspace domain allowlisting by staff.

Edited June 17 by jthompson

[JazzFlute]

1 minute ago, itskdog said:

 

We're another Microsoft school, though we already set up a Workspace tenant previously to allow us to approve restricted videos, such as the ones used in the online Prevent training.

 

In case you weren't aware, you can federate Google with Entra, so staff just have to enter their email address and SSO should take care of the rest. We don't have that set up yet, but might find ourselves doing this soon depending on implementaton.

 

Yes, I was thinking along similar lines in preparation. However, my sticking point is that our current domain was previously registered for an education Google Workspace many years ago by someone who didn’t fully understand what they were doing.

 

I’ve been trying to regain access and set it up properly from scratch, but despite numerous calls and emails, I’ve been unable to resolve the issue and seem to be stuck in limbo.  I know others on here who have had similar problems too.

[tom_newton]

In Australia we've seen kids not being able to have youtube accounts, but being able to access "un-logged-in" youtube, which has had... unintended consequences. Some of the other filter vbendors and I are working with UKSIC to try and get Google to make youtube a bit more school friendly

[Cazab]

On 17/06/2026 at 09:59, JazzFlute said:

 

Yes, I was thinking along similar lines in preparation. However, my sticking point is that our current domain was previously registered for an education Google Workspace many years ago by someone who didn’t fully understand what they were doing.

 

I’ve been trying to regain access and set it up properly from scratch, but despite numerous calls and emails, I’ve been unable to resolve the issue and seem to be stuck in limbo.  I know others on here who have had similar problems too.

If you have access t your DNS records you might be able to claim the domain and set up  new separate workspace? Verify your domain with a TXT record  |  Domain management  |  Google Workspace Help

[FN-GM]

If it plays out anything like Australia, it’ll be business as usual. Everything just carried on here, kids still use social media and very few have ever been asked to prove their age. The ones who did get prompted just VPN to New Zealand, the prompts disappeared, and they keep going.

Edited July 4 by FN-GM