Children struggling to cope with harms encountered online
The number of UK children experiencing some form of harm online remains high – with parents fearing the impacts of harm are getting worse, a new study says.
The annual wellbeing index from online safety charity Internet Matters found that children's emotional resilience is weakening, with a rise in the number choosing to actively avoid certain platforms because of negative interactions.
The survey of parents and children from 1,054 families in the UK found that the impact of the internet on wellbeing has become more extreme, with respondents reporting both the positive and negative impacts of time online have risen this year.
It showed that children appear to be getting more upset when they encounter online harms – 67% of children said they had experienced harm online, which was in line with previous years, but more said they found the experience upsetting or frightening.
Parents too said they felt the impacts of harm online were getting worse, in particular when it comes to graphic violent content, and unhealthy body image or eating habits – both of which saw sharp rises in being flagged as having a negative effect on their children.
The survey also showed that fewer children feel safe online, with the number saying they did so dropping to 77% compared to 81% last year.
Meanwhile, the most prevalent harm this year was false information, which was encountered by 41% of children, according to the study.
However, the study also found that for many children, the positives of being online still outweigh the negatives.
The number of children who said the internet was important for finding supportive communities rose from 44% to 50%.
And parents are also getting better at tracking and understanding their children's online habits, the study said.
Carolyn Bunting, co-chief executive of Internet Matters, said: 'This year's survey shows that the negative sides of online life are on the rise – particularly for vulnerable children. It is encouraging that parents are taking action, however experiences of online harm remain stubbornly high, with two-thirds of all children experiencing harm online.
'It is encouraging to see that children are making greater use of the internet to be creative, to stay active and to find community, and parents and children say the benefits of being online for children's wellbeing continue to outweigh the negatives.
'But we should be alarmed that those negatives are growing faster, that children are feeling more affected and upset by these experiences, and that parents are becoming more worried that excessive time online is negatively affecting their child's physical and mental health.
'Our Index shows there is still a very long way to go until Britain becomes the safest place in the world for children to be online.
'The Online Safety Act is a welcome and important step forward, and the new legislation can't come into effect soon enough.
'Ofcom must now fully exercise its powers and prioritise children's safety so that they can capitalise on the benefits of being online without coming to harm.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Yahoo
Sophie Winkleman: ‘The Royal family are very sweet. I love them all'
Sophie Windsor had never been the type to post much on the class WhatsApp group. The actress, best known for her role as Big Suze in Peep Show, preferred to keep a low profile. 'I just didn't go anywhere near them,' admits the 44-year-old, who has two daughters, Maud, aged 11, and Isabella, aged 9 with her husband Lord Frederick Windsor, the son of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent. 'But then I had to become that maniac mother who got everyone together before Year 7 and said, 'Can we maybe not do this?'.' What Windsor – or Winkleman, as she is known professionally – wanted was to persuade fellow parents not to automatically give their offspring a smartphone on arrival at secondary school. According to Ofcom, the online safety regulator, nine in 10 children own a mobile phone by the time they leave primary school. But having become increasingly alarmed by research revealing how harmful they are to children's health and education, Winkleman attempted to lead a parents' revolt. 'It was so anti my nature to do that. [To be] the sort of noisy, irritating goose at the school gate,' she admits. 'The screen thing I was quite fanatical about because it was so obvious during lockdown that it was such a terrible way to learn. They are completely un-put-down-able – all these devices.' It started out well, but then slowly 'everyone sort of started folding', she explains. 'Year 7's so hard and so stressful. [Maud] was already self-conscious about me being a mum who was against phones – there's nothing less cool, I mean, what a loser. So my daughter's got one now.' She clarifies that the old iPhone allows her to send 'sweet little texts' but doesn't have any apps enabled. Like any parent of Generation Z and Alpha children, Winkleman had tried to resist the lure of screens from an early age. 'I'm incredibly lazy in every other way, apart from screen use. I'm not a hands on mum; they don't do cello and they don't do Chinese, they can just do what they like.' But everything changed when 'their schools gave them iPads without telling me.' She despairs: 'So they're on screen for a lot of the day. They come home, they open up the damn thing again, and they're on screen for two hours doing homework. And it's such a physically unhealthy way to learn. It's so bad for their eyesight, it's bad for their posture, it's bad for their sleep rhythms. It's even bad for hormones and it's terrible cognitively.' Knowing what she does now, having read extensively on the subject, she admits: 'I wasn't robust enough to immediately take them off them. I regret that. I could have just said, 'No, you're not having them' and had a week of hell. I was a bit pathetic.' But now the mother of two has become a leading voice campaigning for phone-free schools – and the removal of most of the educational technology ('EdTech') from classrooms. Earlier this year, she warned of the 'digital destruction of childhood' during a hard-hitting speech at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference in London. She recently joined forces with Jonathan Haidt, the American social psychologist and author of the 2024 book The Anxious Generation – to raise awareness alongside fellow actor and father of five, Hugh Grant. Haidt, who believes smartphones should be banned for under-14s, and under-16s should be prohibited from using social media, argues screens have not just caused an 'epidemic of mental illness' in children, but 'rewired' their brains, resulting in 'attention fragmentation'. The Government has rejected calls for a law banning phones in classrooms, and Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, has dismissed the demands as a 'headline-grabbing gimmick'. At a recent event organised by the campaign group Close Screens, Open Minds at Knightsbridge School in London, Grant, 64, urged parents to take on the Government: 'I don't think politicians ever do anything because it's the right thing to do, even if it's the right thing to do to protect children. They'll only do what gets them votes. They only care about their career.' Winkleman agrees. 'I'm beginning to worry that this country just doesn't care about children. I've been banging on about screen damage to children for about three years now – and now there's a spate of very intelligent articles about how screens are ruining adults' cognitive health and suddenly everyone's very interested.' Like Haidt, who argues modern parents have underprotected their children online and overprotected them in the 'real world', Winkleman is also dismayed by the lack of traditional forms of play. 'It's so healthy for a child to get really bored and start making his or her own fun. That doesn't need to involve any money. I mean, it can involve a piece of paper and a pen or, you know, if you're a baby, a wooden spoon. You don't need these jazz hands tools to be entertained.' She also advocates a return to pen and paper and for children to be encouraged to handwrite rather than type, insisting it 'implants information so much more profoundly and long-lastingly into the brain than typing does'. She adds: 'I think children's brains are completely atrophying because they're just passive vessels for all sorts of content. They're not developing their imagination anymore because they've got these machines, they can be constantly entertained and it's such a mistake. Apparently, if kids keep going on the way they are, spending seven hours a day on screens, it will amount to 22 years of their lives. That's more than a quarter of a person's life.' Sophie is the daughter of Barry Winkleman, publisher of The Times Atlas of World History, and the children's author Cindy Black. The television presenter Claudia Winkleman is her half-sister from her father's first marriage to the journalist Eve Pollard. Educated at the City of London School for Girls and at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where she studied English literature, she developed a passion for acting after joining the Cambridge Footlights. Considering herself 'lucky' to be brought up in leafy north London, she says: 'I was very irritatingly lucky. I have two very wonderful parents who I'm far too close to. It's actually awful how close I am to them. I wish I liked them less. I grew up in Primrose Hill before it had a Space NK, when it was still quite shabby and full of lentil shops.' She met Freddie, who is 54th in line to the throne, after sharing a taxi from a party in Soho on New Year's Eve in 2006, when he recognised her from Peep Show. He works as an executive director at JP Morgan and the couple live in south London. Their 2009 wedding at Hampton Court Palace was attended by around 400 guests, including Princess Eugenie, the Duke and Duchess of Kent, Lady Annabel Goldsmith, actress Jane Asher, Lady Helen Taylor and the singer Bryan Adams. 'It was such a blur because we had to move to Los Angeles the day after and I had to start a brand new job the day after that. So we got married on Saturday and moved everything, our whole lives out to America the day after. And I'd been so concentrating on the work that I hadn't thought about the wedding. 'Which meant that my hair was so disgusting and Freddy still gets upset about it. It was just disgusting. And my mother-in-law chose my dress, which was very sweet and puffy, but I looked barking.' Princess Pushy, as she was cruelly named by the tabloids, chose her dress? 'She sort of took it all over and I actually didn't mind at all. I thought, 'Great, do everything.' I was concentrating on this acting job and saying goodbye to my darling granny who wasn't very well and just doing other stuff. But now I look back on it and think I should have worn a simpler dress and I should have got my hair blow dried by someone who'd done it before.' The Royal family, she insists, were always welcoming. 'Family isn't always brilliant but this lot are very sweet. I love all of them.' Despite finding having the children 'astoundingly knackering', Winkleman has balanced an acting career with a huge amount of charity work and is patron of a number of organisations including the Children's Surgery Foundation and School-Home Support, which, she says, 'keeps children from very tough homes in school and learning.' One of the reasons she campaigns on screens is because of the adverse impact on children from disadvantaged backgrounds. 'The reason we need government intervention is that I think it's predominantly a middle class thing at the moment. It's middle class parents having the confidence to rally people around and say, 'Let's not do this.' And poorer kids are being destroyed by these things. It's not a patronising thing to say. It's true. They're on them all night long. They're going to school wrecked, not focusing, eating rubbish, being angry. I know this because of the education charity and so many teachers I've spoken to. That's why it needs to be a big, old governmental piece of legislation.' Although she says 'I don't think kids should have internet-enabled devices till they finish their GCSEs,' she realises 'it won't happen'. Instead she wants the UK to follow Sweden's lead and remove most of the EdTech from schools, except in the lessons where it's essential, such as computer science. 'They've been very brave and admitted they made a big mistake – that EdTech is a failed experiment. They got computers out of the classroom and reinvested in books, paper and pen. And the children are doing brilliantly. Surprise. Surprise.' The Safer Phones Bill and Online Safety Bill are currently going through Parliament, but Winkleman believes neither go far enough. 'Parents all over the country can get a better grasp on this. I think we have to go towards the doctors and there's a brilliant group called Health Professionals for Safer Screens and they are paediatricians, psychiatrists, optometrists, speech and language therapists. They're all at the coalface seeing what damage screen use in and out of school is doing to children. I think it needs to be a public health warning. They're saying that even 11 to 17-year-olds shouldn't have more than one to two hours of screen time per day.' Parents can mount a revolution, she argues, but ultimately 'it has to come from all the young people'. She adds: 'There was a recent report which interviewed teenagers and asked them, 'If social media and smartphones were banned for all of you, would you be OK with that?' They all said, 'Yes, please,'.' And with that, Winkleman is off to her next acting job: to record a radio play in which she's portraying a mole. She has just finished filming a BBC One drama called Wild Cherry, 'about a group of horrible, competitive, wealthy mothers and their very screwed up teenage daughters.' She laughs: 'I'm playing a complete maniac, which is really fun.' It will certainly be a departure from her clear-eyed and cool-headed quest to lead the mother of all campaigns to end the digital destruction of childhood. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Yahoo
Assisting self-harm could result in five-year jail term under proposed offence
Anyone who assists someone to self-harm – such as by giving them a blade or pills – could face up to five years in prison under plans for a new offence. Ministers are seeking to broaden the law to criminalise those who encourage or assist self-harm online or in person, as part of the Crime and Policing Bill. The move would mean anyone who intend to cause serious self-harm could be prosecuted, even if that did not lead to any injuries. Victims minister Alex Davies-Jones said: 'The prevalence of serious self-harm, especially in young people, is hugely concerning. 'It is an awful truth that some people encourage or assist such behaviour, and one I wanted to draw attention to during Mental Health Awareness Week. 'Whether encouragement is by communication, or more directly by assistance, the outcome is the same. 'We are determined that anybody intending to see others harm themselves is stopped and dealt with in the strongest way.' Under the Online Safety Act 2023, it is already illegal to encourage or assist suicide or self-harm through content online. But the change to the law seeks to replace the existing offence to cover all ways self-harm could be aided. It is understood the new legislation will not criminalise anyone who did not have the intention to cause harm, such as by sharing experiences of self-harm or discussing the issue. Guidance on self-harm suggests it can occur at any age but there is evidence of a 'recent increase' in prevalence among young people in England, according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in 2022. Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, which was set up in memory of 14-year-old Molly Russell who took her own life after viewing thousands of images promoting suicide and self-harm, welcomed the extension of self-harm laws. But he said it 'will not stop the threat posed by those who seek to cause harm online by itself'. He added: 'There is an increasing risk posed by groups and individuals who encourage self-harm online, coercing often young women and girls into self-harm in private messaging and livestreams. 'The reality is that Ofcom's regulation of tech companies is failing to disrupt the encouragement of self-harm online and the Government must step in with stronger online safety laws that can tackle this growing and urgent threat.' Ofcom set out new online safety rules to protect children from harmful content in April, saying the measures will be 'transformational' and force tech firms to do things differently.
Yahoo
04-05-2025
- Yahoo
Duchess of York: Ofcom measures will not be enough to ‘shield our teenagers'
Sarah, Duchess of York, has warned that new Ofcom online safety measures will not be enough to 'shield our teenagers' from a 'tidal wave of filth' on social media. Ofcom's new rules will empower the regulator to issue large fines against social media companies failing to protect child users, and to seek court orders to ban them in the UK entirely in extreme cases. The duchess claimed the measures did not go far enough and tech giants should be treated the same as any other publisher and made 'properly responsible for their content'. In an opinion piece for LBC, Sarah wrote: 'Last week, the media regulator Ofcom published measures intended to improve protections for children online, including requiring tougher age checks and more robust action to prevent children accessing harmful content. 'But I fear this won't do enough to shield our teenagers from the tidal wave of filth and toxicity on social media sites.' The duchess is not the first online safety campaigner to argue the new rules do not go far enough, with others saying tech firms have been allowed excessive control over defining what content is harmful. Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation which was set up in the memory of 14-year-old Molly Russell who ended her life after seeing harmful social media content, called Ofcom's measures a 'series of missed opportunities'. How will your child be kept safer under the Online Safety Act? 🔒 Our new rules for tech companies will help to protect children online. 🔗 Check out our guide for parents to find out more: — Ofcom (@Ofcom) April 30, 2025 The duchess added: 'This isn't a trivial subject. Our teenagers have become more anxious and depressed. 'There was a notable rise in depression which started in 2012, around the time many secondary school children started to get smartphones. 'Excessive social media use has been linked to increased stress, sleep problems, and even self-harm. 'We're only just starting to understand who is vulnerable and what we can do to protect them. 'We do know that in the worst cases, children have taken their own lives after being pursued by cyberbullies. 'Others have died after dangerous prank and challenge videos have been circulated and apparently targeted at youngsters.' Sarah added: 'Let's be honest, much of it is an absolute sewer. 'People say things to each other they wouldn't dream of saying in the real world'. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'The changes we've announced are a reset for children online. 'They will mean safer social media feeds with less harmful and dangerous content, protections from being contacted by strangers and effective age checks on adult content. 'Ofcom has been tasked with bringing about a safer generation of children online, and if companies fail to act they will face enforcement.'
