At the Liberal Democrats' autumn conference in Bournemouth on September 22, 2025, party leaders unveiled a bold new set of proposals aimed squarely at tackling what they describe as a public health crisis: the mental health risks posed to young people by excessive social media use. The centerpiece of their plan? Mandatory, cigarette-style health warnings on social media apps, and a so-called "doomscrolling cap" to limit how long children can spend on addictive video feeds like those found on TikTok.
The move comes as concern mounts across the UK about the impact of technology on young minds. According to research highlighted by the party, children aged eight to seventeen are spending between two and five hours online every day—a statistic that, for many parents, rings all too true. Ofcom, the UK communications regulator, backs up these figures, and the Liberal Democrats argue that it's time for action, not just talk.
Victoria Collins, the party's science and technology spokesperson, delivered the proposals with a sense of urgency. "Just like cigarettes or alcohol, these addictive products carry well-documented risks, especially for young people," she told delegates. "The evidence is clear that excessive use of these apps exposes children to mental health issues, to anxiety, sleep disruption and to real harm to attention spans. Don’t they deserve to know that?" (as reported by BBC and The Guardian).
The party's research is sobering. A poll conducted by Savanta between August 22 and 26, 2025, found that 80% of parents with school-aged children reported at least one negative behavior in their children linked to excessive phone use. These behaviors range from skipping meals and poor sleep to eye strain, headaches, and even the abandonment of hobbies or sports clubs in favor of more screen time. One in five parents admitted to having family arguments about excessive phone use, while 19% said their children had lost interest in extracurricular activities because of social media.
Perhaps most strikingly, young people themselves are sounding the alarm. According to Daily Mail, one sixth-former described social media as "as addictive as a drug, and I feel the negative effects of my addiction to it every day." The party's polling also found that a quarter of parents said their children experienced difficulty sleeping after using their phones too much, 18% noticed an impact on their children's appetite, and 13% observed eye strain or headaches.
The Liberal Democrats' proposed health warnings would be modeled on the graphic labels that have been mandatory on cigarette packets in the UK since 2008. Alcoholic beverages in the country must also display alcohol volume and, often, warnings against drinking while pregnant. The party believes that social media, as a "key driver of a crisis in young people's mental health," should be treated no differently. Collins argued, "When we pick up a pack of cigarettes or a bottle of wine, we expect to be told about the harm those products will pose to our health. So why is social media any different?"
The "doomscrolling cap"—a term that might feel new to some—would limit under-18s to just two hours of TikTok-style video viewing per day. The idea is to end the "infinite scroll" feature that keeps children glued to their screens, and to ensure that platforms are not exploiting addictive algorithms at the expense of young people's wellbeing. The proposal also calls for platforms to adjust the algorithms that determine what children see in their feeds, a requirement that has already begun to take shape under new UK regulations introduced in July 2025.
These new rules, which came into force this summer, require tech companies to change the way content is served to children and to strengthen age verification checks. Children must now be at least 13 to create their own social media profiles, and the Liberal Democrats have previously pushed—though unsuccessfully—to raise the minimum age for data collection by tech companies to 16.
The party's proposals aren't without precedent. Vivek Murthy, the U.S. Surgeon General under President Joe Biden, suggested similar health warnings for under-18s in the United States, pointing to research on the mental health impacts of social media. The Liberal Democrats are drawing inspiration from these international efforts, arguing that the UK should lead the way in protecting young people online.
However, the proposals land in a political landscape already crowded with competing ideas. The Labour government is considering its own two-hour cap on individual social media apps for children, as well as a 22:00 curfew. Meanwhile, the Conservatives have previously called for an England-wide ban on smartphones in schools. Labour, for its part, has stopped short of legislating for such a ban, though it is reviewing guidance that allows headteachers to make decisions about phone use in their schools.
Despite these efforts, Collins was quick to criticize the current government for what she sees as a lack of follow-through. "Ministers make noise about online safety but have yet failed to deliver on promises of stronger time curbs," she said. She didn't spare Labour's former science secretary, Peter Kyle, either, accusing him of "mooting time caps or curfews on addictive social apps—then moving on to another department leaving behind a record of failure."
The debate over online safety has also drawn in high-profile figures from the tech world. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey recently called for Ofcom to investigate Elon Musk's X platform (formerly Twitter) for allegedly allowing images of child abuse and self-harm instructions to proliferate. Musk, for his part, has accused the UK government of undermining free speech with the Online Safety Act, a claim that Labour officials dispute, insisting that the legislation is designed to protect children from harm.
For many parents and educators, the Liberal Democrats' proposals may feel overdue. The risks associated with excessive social media use—anxiety, depression, sleep disruption, and declining attention spans—are well documented, and the polling suggests that families are already feeling the effects in their daily lives. Yet, as with so many issues at the intersection of technology and public health, the devil is in the details. How to implement these health warnings, enforce time caps, and balance safety with freedom of expression will be the subject of fierce debate in the months ahead.
What is clear, though, is that the conversation has shifted. With both major parties and the Liberal Democrats proposing new regulations, and with growing public awareness of the problem, the question is no longer whether action is needed—but what form it should take. The Liberal Democrats, for their part, have thrown down the gauntlet with their cigarette-style warnings and doomscrolling cap. Now, the rest of Westminster—and Silicon Valley—will have to respond.
