Burnham urged to rein in Big Tech over child harm after Meta’s $17bn bombshell settlement
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
Child-safety campaigners have urged Andy Burnham to impose tougher controls on major technology companies after Meta reached a US settlement with 29 states over allegations that its platforms harmed young users. The Molly Rose Foundation said the agreement demonstrates that governments can compel platforms to alter design choices which encourage prolonged use and may expose children to harmful content, while criticising Meta’s lack of an admission of wrongdoing.
Meta will pay up to $17bn (£12.5bn) and introduce US-only safeguards for teenage Facebook and Instagram users, including daily limits, night-time restrictions and hidden like and reaction counts. The UK government said it was monitoring the case and pointed to the Online Safety Act, a planned under-16 social-media ban and measures targeting addictive features such as infinite scroll; campaigners argue platforms should carry greater responsibility.
- Meta’s US settlement prompts calls for stronger UK child-safety rules.
- The deal includes $17bn and new US-only teen safeguards.
- Campaigners want platforms held accountable for harmful design.
New here? Start with this
Social media companies run services used by millions of children and teenagers, including Facebook and Instagram, both owned by Meta. Campaigners and regulators have raised concerns that some features, such as endlessly refreshing feeds, alerts and visible reaction counts, may encourage young people to spend long periods online.
Governments have increasingly considered rules requiring platforms to protect children from harmful content and design. In the UK, the Online Safety Act places duties on technology firms, while ministers have also discussed further age-related restrictions on social media use.
Meta is one of the world’s largest technology companies, and legal action against it in the United States has focused attention on how platforms design services for younger users. The debate concerns whether voluntary company measures are enough, or whether governments should set stricter requirements and enforce them.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of stronger intervention argue that the settlement shows governments can compel platforms to reduce features designed to maximise teenage engagement, and that the potential risks to children justify acting before further evidence of harm accumulates. They contend that measures such as limits on infinite scrolling, overnight protections and age-based safeguards would place child welfare ahead of advertising-driven incentives, while greater transparency would allow public scrutiny of what companies knew.
The case against
Opponents of additional or blanket restrictions argue that the UK should first assess whether the Online Safety Act and existing protections are working, rather than rapidly importing terms from a US settlement reached without an admission of wrongdoing. They warn that a broad under-16 ban or prescriptive design rules could be difficult to enforce reliably, may encourage intrusive age verification, and could restrict young people’s access to social connection and useful online services without clear evidence that each measure will improve safety.
Full account
Child-safety campaigners have urged Andy Burnham’s government to press major social-media companies for stronger protections after Meta agreed a substantial settlement in the United States. The deal resolves litigation brought by 29 US states, which alleged that Meta had harmed young users through Facebook and Instagram. Meta has not accepted liability, but is expected to pay up to $17bn, although one report places the potential figure nearer $18bn.
The US agreement includes default limits on teenage use, including a two-hour daily cap that parents may override, overnight restrictions between midnight and 6am, and limits on notifications at night and during school hours. It also provides for young users not to see public counts of likes and reactions. Meta said it wanted comparable standards to be adopted by other platforms, including TikTok and YouTube.
Rowan Ferguson of the Molly Rose Foundation said the settlement showed that governments could compel platform companies to alter product features that may encourage excessive use or expose children to harmful material. He argued that Britain should use the moment to address design and commercial incentives across the sector, while criticising Meta’s refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing. The foundation, established in memory of Molly Russell, has campaigned for measures targeting addictive platform design and harmful content.
Ministers indicated that Britain should not offer children weaker protection than that available in America. Pat McFadden said the government expected Meta to extend safeguards to UK users, alongside proposed restrictions on social-media access for under-16s and overnight settings for older teenagers. The reports place the debate in a wider international trend, with several countries introducing or considering age-based limits on social-media access.
Where outlets differ
Source 1 frames the response chiefly as a call from campaigners for Andy Burnham to confront Big Tech and stresses disappointment that the settlement ended without an admission of fault. Source 2 foregrounds Pat McFadden’s expectation that Meta should apply equivalent safeguards in Britain, and gives more detail on the US measures and international restrictions.
The reports differ slightly on the maximum settlement value: Source 1 says up to $17bn (£12.5bn), while Source 2 says up to $18bn (£13bn).
They also present different political context: Source 1 refers to a government under Andy Burnham and attributes the under-16 policy announcement to Sir Keir Starmer; Source 2 describes Starmer’s government and quotes McFadden. Both accounts nevertheless centre on extending child protections in the UK.
More coverage
- The Guardian — UK expects Meta to match US child safety measures after $18bn settlement
- The Guardian — Meta will be happy with its $18bn US settlement – but the costs of child online safety will keep rising for big tech | Chris Stokel-Walker