Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United Kingdom Privacy

UK Official Promises Statements 'Around VPNs' and Further Teen Restrictions on Chatbots and Social Media (pcgamer.com) 30

PC Gamer reports: The UK government is considering an Australia-style ban on social media for under-16s, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer saying that the ban could take effect as soon as spring next year. As for the much nearer future, Science and Technology Secretary Liz Kendall told BBC Breakfast earlier this week, "We will make further statements in July about VPNs and further restrictions."

To be clear, no specific restrictions have yet been announced and Kendall sounded somewhat cautious about an outright ban during a parliament debate that took place the same day. "I have commissioned further research about their usage. There are really important issues to balance here," she says. "Many people want to use VPNs for privacy — that is important — but we know that some children use them to get around restrictions. I will come back to that in July in our response to the consultation." So, we'll have to wait until next month for anything definite, but it's hard not to feel like a full ban on VPNs is already on the table. If that does come to pass, more than the contents of my Bluesky inbox will be at stake.

Utah in the US has already tried to implement a full VPN ban (though this was postponed until September after Aylo, the parent company of Pornhub, challenged the law in court)... [T]he UK could just be the next domino after Utah, potentially setting off a chain reaction that affects users around the world.

The article also argues that age checks can also be a privacy nightmare "with the security breach that exposed the personal info of 70,000 Discord users last year being one case in point."

Here's the complete statement from UK Technology Secretary Kendall. "I'll come back in July with a further statement around VPNs but also additional measures that we want to look at, further restrictions on AI chatbots that parents have found very worrying, more about overnight curfews or breaks in doomscrolling for 16- and 17-year-olds."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Official Promises Statements 'Around VPNs' and Further Teen Restrictions on Chatbots and Social Media

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    assuming he's going to PM next week, much less next spring

  • by Kunedog ( 1033226 ) on Sunday June 21, 2026 @05:16PM (#66203172)
    The gov made a "video game" meant to convince kids that thinking, exploring ideas, and especially protesting were the worst things you could possibly do, and backfired pretty badly:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    Best to cut teens off from social media altogether lest they explore ideas there anyway, I suppose.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's all up in the air now. Starmer resigned, and it looks like Burnham will run unopposed. He may keep the social media ban, as that has happened in other countries and seems to be reasonably popular and sensible. Should extend it to over 65s as well.

      But the VPN ban I can see being walked back quickly as unworkable and unpopular. A pointless fight to have before the social media ban has even been tested.

  • Or just a ban for VPNs that don't store customer data? For age verification only, of course ...

  • by xack ( 5304745 ) on Sunday June 21, 2026 @05:56PM (#66203216)
    Before it's too late.
  • by TJHook3r ( 4699685 ) on Sunday June 21, 2026 @06:18PM (#66203238)
    And here we get to the real issue - VPNs can be used by political activists to have conversations safely. And by 'activists' I mean anybody who doesn't abide by whatever groupthink is in place this week
  • by eneville ( 745111 ) on Sunday June 21, 2026 @06:30PM (#66203248) Homepage

    How gov ministers will WFH

  • by hwstar ( 35834 ) on Sunday June 21, 2026 @07:19PM (#66203284)

    balkanized Internet. One where the ISP's won't route to known VPN's.

    Will ISP's require a security handshake locked to a person's biometrics for each computer in a household to determine whether it is permitted to visit certain web sites? Won't this just ID everyone using that computer? I guess that would mean the end of anonymous speech, and the beginning of a total control by the government.

  • I don't know why you would bother to reference it. Utah's law is useless and means nothing. Utah can't enforce it nor do they have the power to actually punish any entities.

    • by MikeS2k ( 589190 )

      Because it shows intent - this is what the powers that be want for all of us. It was fun to joke about the UK, believing this was some kooky thing the UK government came up with all by itself. But the truth is the UK was a trial run for this increased surveillance; now they are happy with how it has gone they will roll this out in more Western countries. Utah and I hear Texas will be next; France has done something similar, Red states will start it off in the US but it will spread country wide before l

      • by Bahbus ( 1180627 )

        My point is that the idea's are equally useless and unenforceable in the UK. Like they want to make ME on the hook for doing my best to guard my website against teens but they got around it anyway? Yeah, fuck that. This only hurts businesses and people in the UK and benefits literally no one. I don't live there, I don't have business assets there, I don't plan on going there, so they can fine me all they like because I'm never going to give them a dime. If I were to get any legal documents, I will simply re

  • freedom of expression !
  • Why remove the users from the porn, just remove the porn from the internet.

    All points on one direction: two internets, one without porn, social media, enshitification - just stuff you need, and the other a cesspit full of fraudsters, porn, other crap.

The party adjourned to a hot tub, yes. Fully clothed, I might add. -- IBM employee, testifying in California State Supreme Court

Working...