Telegram CEO Warns Teen Social Media Ban Could Trigger Bigger Online Risks

(The Chief Executive Officer of Telegram, Pavel Durov. Photo Credit: Forbes)

The Chief Executive Officer of Telegram, Pavel Durov, has cautioned that government-imposed bans on social media for teenagers would not shield them from harm but would instead expose them to even greater risks online.

Durov made these remarks on Tuesday in reaction to a new policy by the United Kingdom government restricting teenagers under the age of 16 from accessing social media platforms.

Speaking online, he argued that an outright ban would push young people toward encrypted networks and unregulated corners of the internet where genuine danger thrives, noting that tech-savvy adolescents would simply find ways around the restrictions using Virtual Private Networks, VPNs.

He maintained that banning social media for teens would only place them in greater danger, since they would be compelled to switch to VPNs and, in the process, gain access to far more harmful and illegal content.

Drawing a parallel with Russia’s earlier attempt to block Telegram, Durov pointed out that the effort ultimately failed, as about 95 per cent of Russian teenagers continued accessing the platform through VPNs.

He further questioned the UK’s mandatory age-verification requirements, which call for users to submit identity documents, facial scans, or banking details, suggesting that the policy’s true intent may lean more toward mass digital surveillance than genuine child protection.

According to reports making the rounds online, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer had announced plans to bar children under 16 from using major social media platforms, including Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X, describing the move as essential to safeguarding young people from online harm and addictive design.

Starmer argued that social media’s addictive features were contributing to unhappiness among children and insisted that protecting their safety and wellbeing left no room for compromise, stating firmly that the ban would proceed.

Durov, however, maintained that government regulation cannot substitute for responsible parenting, noting that parents already have access to tools such as parental controls and screen-time limits to manage their children’s digital habits.

He argued that no law could fix poor parenting choices, pointing out that many parents hand toddlers iPads simply to keep them quiet, a habit he said no amount of regulation could correct.