London - So, the Usual Suspects – NSPCC, Molly Rose Foundation, and the ironically named 'Smartphone Free Childhood' – are at it again, whining to Prime Minister Keir Starmer about the horrors of TikTok and Insta for the under-16 set. Apparently, infinite scrolling and disappearing messages are the new boogeymen.

These professional pearl-clutchers want Starmer to ditch the Aussie-style blanket ban (which, let's be honest, is probably unconstitutional anyway) and instead focus on censoring 'risky' apps. Translation: anything that doesn't fit their approved narrative. They're basically saying, 'Let's not ban the internet, just the parts we don't like.'

Their argument? A full-blown ban would create a 'safety cliff edge' for teenagers. You know, because being able to access endless streams of curated propaganda is vital for their emotional well-being. Never mind the fact that kids were perfectly fine before smartphones existed.

They're demanding that tech platforms prove their 'safety' before being allowed to prey on impressionable youngsters. Sounds like a bureaucratic nightmare waiting to happen. Who gets to decide what's 'safe'? The same government that can't define a woman?

Of course, this is all conveniently timed with the closing of a government consultation on online safety. Translation: they want to influence the outcome and ensure their woke agenda is enshrined in law. They're probably salivating at the thought of Ofcom, the UK's version of the Thought Police, deciding what kids can and can't see.

Smartphone Free Childhood, bless their hearts, wants to restrict access for under-16s, because apparently, the only way to protect children is to turn them into digital hermits. Reminds me of those parents who ban sugar and then wonder why their kids binge on candy at their friend's house.

Joe Ryrie, director of Smartphone Free Childhood, bleats about access to children being a 'privilege that must be earned.' By whom? The Ministry of Truth?

Andy Burrows, head of the Molly Rose Foundation, wants 'safe app design' to be a precondition for tech firms in the UK. In other words, he wants to regulate the internet into oblivion. Bet he's a blast at parties.

The Future of Technology Institute, FlippGen, and People vs Big Tech are also on board, because apparently, no good virtue signal goes unrewarded. And a government spokesperson, predictably, chirped about keeping children safe online. It's not a question of whether we'll act, but how we'll strip away your freedom, they imply.