Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Social Networks The Internet Technology

Norway Set to Become Latest Country to Ban Social Media for Under 16s (yahoo.com) 50

Norway plans to ban social media access for children under 16 (source paywalled; alternative source), "joining a growing number of countries responding to concerns about the potential harm kids face online," reports Bloomberg. From the report: The bill comes after "overwhelming" demand from the public, the government said Friday. It plans to bring the legislation to parliament before the end of the year. The limit will apply up until January 1 the year a child turns 16 with technology companies responsible for age verification, the government said. "We want a childhood where children get to be children," Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store said in the statement. "Play, friendships, and everyday life must not be taken over by algorithms and screens." "Children cannot be left with the responsibility for staying away from platforms they are not allowed to use," Karianne Tung, Norway's minister of digitalization, said in the statement. "That responsibility rests with the companies providing these services."

Recent Slashdot coverage of countries instituting or proposing social media bans has included Australia, France, Austria, Indonesia, and Denmark.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Norway Set to Become Latest Country to Ban Social Media for Under 16s

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 24, 2026 @01:05PM (#66110476)
    What about the parents?
    • by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Friday April 24, 2026 @01:46PM (#66110576) Homepage

      Realistically most parents aren't monitoring what their kids are doing online. When my kids were in grade 7 and starting to complain that all their friends had devices (and cell phones), I was shocked to learn that many of the kids in their grade had already seen Deadpool. This is an R-rated film, and specifically it has explicit sex scenes and a ton of gore. I'm OK with parents making decisions for their own kids and even watching an R-rated film with them if the parent has OK'd it (I watched the Matrix with my kids when they were 13), but it was clear that these kids just had an iPad with Netflix and Disney+ installed and there was no parental locking, so they could watch whatever they wanted.

      Believing that parents will monitor what their kids do online is like believing they'll feed them breakfast every morning. We have breakfast programs in schools for a reason.

      • I don't care if they do or not. It should still be the parents' responsibility and if someone should be punished for their children's actions, it should be them.

        • It depends if you're interested in fixing the problems or just dishing out punishment for its own sake.

          You have individual parents facing up against megacorps with hundreds of billions in resources, because they want to capture that sweet advertising revenue. Parents don't stand a chance, and punishing them, then punishing them ever harder won't give them a chance.

          • It depends if you're interested in fixing the problems or just dishing out punishment for its own sake.

            What I'm not interested in are the inevitable ID verification schemes in the name of thinking of the children.

            • What I'm not interested in are the inevitable ID verification schemes in the name of thinking of the children.

              And I'm not interested in the tide coming in and yet...

              I don't want ID either, but pretending the problems don't really exist or proposing even worse solutions simply because you don't like the only proposed solution is inefficient.

              • "Do something!"

                No, no, no.

                Do something intelligent.

                Any dildo can come up with schemes to fix social problems which create terrible new social problems.

                • No, no, no.

                  Do something intelligent.

                  You know what isn't intelligent? Blaming social problems caused by global megacorps on individual parents simply because you don't like some of the conclusions being reached.

                  Any dildo can come up with schemes to fix social problems which create terrible new social problems.

                  Cool. Yelling "you're a dildo and it's your fault" is not going to make people change their minds.

                  • Cool. Yelling "you're a dildo and it's your fault" is not going to make people change their minds.

                    Are the "minds" in the room with us now?

                    People demanding change whether it makes sense or not cannot ever be reasoned with. You have to oppose them another way, like by mobilizing people capable of thought.

            • They're not inevitable, they're just what politicians latch onto.

              The simplest way to make this all work is to encourage web browsers to support a password protected "date of birth" field. When websites send content they can include an age range that says what ages their content is aimed at. They would lose S.230 protections if they don't include that field.

              This simple change would require no IDs, no identification of users, not even dates of birth being transmitted, and it'd mean Facebook et al can lock out

      • by Anonymous Coward

        please show data for "most parents arent monitor what their kids are doing online"

        anecdote for sure - but i work with 5 parents at my job, they ALL use some form of monitor software to keep track of their kids locations and actions.

        we live in a world where monitoring and tracking are easier than ever, this trope that no parents are paying attention is just flat out wrong. maybe in the 80s-early 00s but not in 2026.

        • by RobinH ( 124750 )
          I didn't say 'no parents', I said 'most'. Also, you're posting on slashdot so your 5 parents that you work with are highly likely to be working in the tech world. Sure, people who understand technology are more likely to be skeptical of social media and AI and are going to teach their kids online safety and are going to limit it. But that's certainly a minority of parents. The vast majority of non-computer people will go onto google, type a question in, and 100% believe the entire AI blurb that it spits
    • by dskoll ( 99328 ) on Friday April 24, 2026 @05:06PM (#66110900) Homepage

      Parents cannot fight the social media companies, which have armies of psychologists working on making their products more addictive. Adults are in as much danger from social media as kids are, IMO.

      I want a blanket ban on the business models used by social media platforms. No "engagement+surveillance capitalism" business models should be allowed; they should be illegal. For everyone, not just for kids.

    • by sit1963nz ( 934837 ) on Friday April 24, 2026 @08:26PM (#66111044)
      The parents are the ones wanting this.
      50% of parents are below average, and of those I would guess 90%+ are IT illiterate
      Too many parents are working multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water
      So, they are 100% behind a solution that they can live with.

      And I agree with them , social media is a plague on humanity.
      The people who own social media platforms KNOW they are addictive, harmful, etc etc etc , bit so long as they make billions its a who cares from them.

      Other industries, tobacco, alcohol, gambling porn, etc ....they all ended up with regulatory controls and age restrictions, and social media needs the same restrictions applied.

      Does not have to be perfect, so system is, but if they can get 80% or more kids off social media, it will become a place they dont go to anyway, none of their friends are on it, and it will become boring for them, so more will just not bother.
  • Weird (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 0123456 ( 636235 ) on Friday April 24, 2026 @01:12PM (#66110490)

    It's almost like there's a conspiracy between all of these governments to force adults to provide ID before they can post online.

    • Yeap, as if the teens would not be able to communicate online...
    • Age limits for social media are being discussed and have been proposed or implemented in 17 European countries, the EU, Canada, the US, 3 countries in Latin America, 4 in Africa and 9 in Asia. Age limits vary slightly but are usually 15 or 16, and then there is the question of how to define social media.
    • by znrt ( 2424692 )

      they are conflating two very different issues: safety and mental health.

      - safety is addressable by access restriction, but:
      -- success and risk depend on tech implementation and regulation
      -- risk of false sense of security
      -- it's all or nothing, meaning it also restricts access that is potentially positive
      -- it's common knowledge that the vast majority of child sexual abuse happens in family circles

      - mental health is not really addressable by access restriction
      -- it's mainly addresable by parenting, educatio

      • ...personally, i think the whole thing is a red herring to control public opinion and discourse, the intended target being adult citizens

        That's an odd take considering that social media is provided solely for the specific purposes of controlling and influencing peoples opinions. You'd think a freedom-loving person like yourself would want to insulate people from that kind of intense, addictive influence until they've had an opportunity to form opinions of their own.

        • by znrt ( 2424692 )

          social media is provided solely for the specific purposes of controlling and influencing peoples opinions.

          because social media is about the only medium where that works both ways, which is exactly why control is so urgent, moreso since it is progressively replacing traditional (mainstream) media which has been already captive for decades.

          it's also not only to silence opinions, they already can do that to a considerable extent (banning, shadowbanning, exclusion, bots, influencers). personal identification would also allow swift action on individuals (mind, they already do that too, but only to people who expose

    • Not the internet, social media or other places where kids may hang out.

      I remember the cry of doom when it air travel became smoke free, restaurant became smoke free, etc etc
      It did not happen

      You need a licence to drive a car ( in spite of what soviets say), ID to buy alcohol, enter adult entertainment places, buy weed, etc etc.

      So this too is another end of the world socialism, etc etc etc.
      But if you bothered to look, nordic countries have a far better quality of life than the USA does. Social
    • No conspiracy necessary. Norway is a dystopian nightmare in terms of surveilance. Most places don't take cash and everybody is used to pay with a card or their mobile phone. Using a lot of the main roads means paying for tolls, which means all cars have an electronic device for that in addition to the ubiquitous license plate reading cameras for catching the freeloaders. They have a digital ID system that is controlled by the banks (Bank-ID) that you can't take a shit without. The government knows where yo
  • ..where kids find workarounds
    Kids are smart and good at finding workarounds
    Making it harder might make it more desirable

    • Work around four what ?
      If none of their friends are on it, they won't bother. Lot of social media type stuff has been and gone once it was no longer interesting for the kids.

      And it's like vaccines, 90% gives heard immunity.
  • First off, there's loads fishy about letting the corporations do the checking, that's just wrong in many ways.

    Second, you say what about the parents? Well, what about them? If you think parents can avoid their 15 y.o. from doing much of anything that they're really set on doing, you've no idea of parenting.

    Now, the really good thing about such bans in my experience was that our under 16 kids couldn't be asked by others to, for instance, join a WhatsApp chat. Meaning, no teacher could use that as an offi

  • My hunting ground! They be taking my hunting grounds! Well, I can always troll the boba shops. /s
  • Social media is worse than smoking and possibly drinking. At least we can treat the physical addiction of smoking, and to some degree the psychological addition.

    Our society and our institutions don't have great tools for mass deprogramming people who have been psychologically manipulated by media and tech for their formative years.

    Societal collapse is a well-documented phenomenon in human history, and there is likely nothing special about our world culture that makes us any more immune from collapse than a

    • The dopamine and other neuro chemical hits kids get while their brain is developing is the real harm.
      They are addictive
      That is a well known fact by Social media, other sites, and "influencers".

      So long as THEY get wealthy, they don't care what harms they od.
    • That's a gross exaggeration.

      Smoking kills ~480,000 yearly in the US alone. That's more than the ~420,000 killed by WWII.

      Booze kills ~ 178,000. That's more per year than the Korean and Viet Nam wars combined. It's more than the TOTAL combat losses in all post-WWII US wars.

      The masses were always stupid. Social media merely shows the rest of us what they're really like.

      • Is death the only harm we should consider?

        Children don't usually die of smoking. They can develop asthma from second hand smoke.
        Or a life long addiction as an adult that does indeed put them at risk of lung disease, cancer, and more. (grandfather had oral cancer, then throat cancer, then finally lung cancer which metastasized to his brain)

        I believe that device addiction at an early age puts children at higher risk of disability. That we are going to find ourselves with a generation that has a significant po

  • That would be a boon for tech literacy.

    Forbid more. It builds curiosity.

  • I like to think that in the United States, that programs that work in individual states are Nationalized, so a small experiment can be used to expand and benefit many more people. I would also like think that experiments work in other Countries can work in the United States. There is more to life than what the Dow Jones is.

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...