HomeOpinionMessaging Is the Risk. Banning the Whole Shop Isn’t.

Messaging Is the Risk. Banning the Whole Shop Isn’t.

TLDR: The under-16 social media ban is the right move. Folding Vinted and eBay into it because of private messages is understandable, but it’s the wrong tool. The chat is the problem. Moderate that. Don’t pretend a second-hand clothes site is TikTok.

The BBC reported this week that Lisa Nandy is “looking seriously” at adding Vinted and eBay (and likely Depop and Facebook Marketplace) to the under-16 ban that starts next spring. The reason is the messaging functions. Strangers can contact kids. Grooming happens. Same logic already being applied to Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat.

I support the core ban. These platforms are built to keep children scrolling, comparing and chasing the next hit. The mental-health and attention damage is real enough that treating them like age-restricted products is overdue. Parents have been asking for something sharper than voluntary “controls” for years. Do it.

Marketplaces are not the same thing. Their job is buying and selling. A 15-year-old on Vinted is usually looking for a jacket, not performing for an algorithm. eBay is older and more transactional. Both already claim 18+. The actual risk is the private chat box. That is a real problem. Groomers go where unsupervised contact exists.

So fix the chat. Age-gate the messaging. Turn it off for under-16s by default. Require stronger parental controls and real moderation instead of the light-touch systems these platforms currently run. Make the stranger-contact feature the restricted part, not the entire site. The original government line was that e-commerce would sit outside the ban. Expanding it now because “any platform with a message button” starts to look like the rules are growing because they can, not because the risk is identical.

Support the principle: keep under-16s off the main social platforms. Be precise about the edges. A marketplace that exists to move goods isn’t a feed designed to hold attention. Treating them as the same thing blurs the difference and makes the whole policy easier to dismiss.

What do you think? Is the messaging risk enough to ban the platforms outright, or should they just be forced to lock down the chat?

Previous article

Most Popular