Schleswig-Holstein’s leading minister, Daniel Günther of the CDU, has called for an immediate ban on social‑media usage by children and teens under 16. “We must act as swiftly as possible to keep the next generation from being exposed to the extremes that exist online at such a sensitive age” he told the “FAZ” Thursday edition.
According to Günther, youngsters on these platforms encounter horror films, violence, pornography, pedophilia, AI‑driven conversations, bullying and beauty ideals that can lead to eating disorders-material that he believes children are simply not equipped to handle. He added that he wants to spare children in Germany from having to endure what many have already faced. “I want all kids in our state to be protected from what they have had to stand through” he said.
The CDU’s state association plans to submit a motion at the party federal convention in Stuttgart to prohibit the use of certain social‑media channels for anyone under 16. The motion‑committee will recommend forwarding the proposal to the party’s committees and the Bundestag caucus. “We want a decision on this issue at the convention” Günther said, confident that the motion would win a majority. He cited a “broad societal majority” in favor, with surveys indicating 70-80 % support for a ban on under‑16 usage, especially among those who have recently experienced such content. “That should make us think very carefully” he added, emphasizing that “time must not be wasted; we must finally protect our children and young people”.
When asked about the SPD’s suggestion to cap social‑media use at 14 years, Günther acknowledged that meaningful age limits can spark debate but argued that 16 is the appropriate threshold. He accused social‑media operators of exploiting algorithms to reinforce addictive behavior.
Günther also addressed a dispute with the online portal “Nius”. In a talk show, he accused the outlet of publishing completely fact‑free coverage and afterward faced accusations of censorship. He told the “FAZ” that he has never demanded press censorship. “What transpired after my comments confirmed everything I said” he said, noting that statements had been shortened and distorted. He insists that as a politically active person he should still be free to express his views-even if the portal seeks to limit him. He maintained that discussing the difference between journalism and the political agitation of so‑called “alternative media” is essential.
