Parenting the Whole Nation: Sir Keir, the Internet Nanny

Sir Keir Starmer has announced that the British state will now take a more active role in raising the nation’s children. Not by fixing schools, not by making streets safer, and certainly not by addressing the grooming gangs that operated with institutional protection for years.

The proposal follows the mostly failed Australian model and is aimed at stopping under-16s from using high-risk platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook, X, Threads, Reddit, Twitch and Kick.

Truth Social and Gab do not appear to be in scope. One can only assume this is an oversight.

Meanwhile, Bluesky - the platform that has become the preferred home for large sections of the British and American far left - continues without restriction. This is the same platform that had to quadruple its content moderation team after a documented surge in child sexual abuse material as its user base exploded.

Apparently this is not a sufficient threat to warrant the same treatment as Instagram or YouTube.

It is also worth noting that several of the platforms - X, Facebook and Threads have long been dominated by older audiences. Banning platforms that young people have already abandoned is a strange way to demonstrate urgent concern for their safety - unless the goal is something other than protecting children.

The government is also extending its reach beyond classic social media.

Gaming, messaging and interactive platforms may face restrictions on features such as contact with adult strangers, disappearing messages, location sharing and livestreaming. Older teenagers aged 16 and 17 could also see limits on late-night scrolling and access to certain addictive or sexualised features.

Here is the part they prefer not to emphasise: a ban on children using social media requires platforms to apply age verification to everyone. Adults may therefore have to prove they are adults before using ordinary social media.

“Age assurance” can involve facial age estimation, photo ID matching, credit card checks, banking data, mobile network verification or digital identity services. Once this infrastructure exists, it rarely stays limited to its original purpose. What begins with children’s social media easily expands to gaming platforms, anonymous posting, political forums and comment sections.

We are all looking forward to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology deciding who your teenager is allowed to speak to while playing Fortnite - and requiring the rest of us to scan our faces to prove we are old enough to watch.

This is not the role of the state.

Parents are supposed to parent.

The government is supposed to govern.

Yet once again we are treated to politicians who cannot control the borders, cannot control crime in major cities, and cannot stop actual predators, announcing that they will now micromanage the private digital lives of families instead.

In the end, the government may succeed in its mission.

Future historians may note that the main achievement of this policy was ensuring British children spent their teenage years on Gab, Truth Social, 4chan, Telegram and whatever platforms the next generation of technically gifted 14-year-olds decide to build. A victory of sorts.