Starmer bans social media for under-16s, paving way for digital ID

Starmer bans social media for under-16s: the perfect excuse for digital ID

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced a ban on social media access for under-16s. The official line cites protecting children from harmful algorithms, but the measure has a side effect few overlook: to verify age, all users, including adults, will have to identify themselves. The digital ID, which failed in Parliament months ago due to public opposition, is now sneaking in through the back door.

The logistics of control: impossible without universal identification

Preventing a minor from accessing social media without requiring some form of identification is technically unfeasible. The only reliable way is for each user to prove their age, which de facto means mandatory digital identity registration. In the UK, historically resistant to identity cards (a legacy of Magna Carta), this system had been rejected. Now, under the guise of child protection, it is resurfacing.

Elon Musk has already called it a "surveillance state." And with good reason: once the system is in place, nothing prevents its extension to other uses. As critical analyses point out, "first the minors, then everyone." Some defend the measure as a necessary step to curb the "indoctrination" and "mental hacking" of young people. But skeptical consensus dominates.

The Bluesky exception and the US precedent

One detail fuels suspicion: apparently, the social network Bluesky would be exempt from the ban. Given its ideological profile more aligned with pogre, it is seen as a gesture that exposes the political nature of the measure, rather than a purely protective one.

In the United States, more than 25 states have passed similar age verification laws to access adult content or social media. Louisiana pioneered the use of state digital IDs like LA Wallet. Texas, Utah, and Florida have trinc the same path. The precedent shows that once the requirement is normalized, digital identification expands.

Although in the UK the measure is presented as a shield for minors, the implementation costs will fall on the platforms and ultimately on users. The surveillance exoskeleton grows, and the promise of digital freedom fades. If digital ID becomes entrenched, the debate on privacy and social control will take a new and dangerous turn. The question is how long it will take to reach other countries.