Children as young as three are “being fed content and algorithms designed to hook adults” on social media, a former education minister has warned.

Lord John Nash said analysis by the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) suggesting more than 800,000 UK children aged between three and five were already engaging with social media was “deeply alarming”.

The peer, who served as minister for the school system between 2013 and 2017, said that “children who haven’t yet learned to read [are] being fed content and algorithms designed to hook adults”, which, he said, “should concern us all”.

He called for “a major public health campaign so parents better understand the damage being done, and legislation that raises the age limit for social media to 16 whilst holding tech giants to account when they fail to keep children off their platforms”.

The CSJ reached the figure by applying the latest population data to previous research by Ofcom.

The internet and communications watchdog found that almost four in 10 parents of a three to five year-old reported that their child uses at least one social media app or site.

With roughly 2.2 million children in this age group as of 2024, the CSJ said this suggests there could be 814,000 users of social media between three and five years old, a rise of around 220,000 users from the year before.

Lord Nash is among those who have demanded the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill ban under-16s from having access to social media, something that will become law in Australia next month.

From 10 December, social media platforms will have to take reasonable steps to prevent under-16s from having a social media account, in effect blocking them from platforms such as Meta’s Instagram, TikTok and Snap’s Snapchat.

Ministers hope it will protect children from harmful content and online predators.

But one teenager who is against the idea is suing the Australian government as, he says, the measure would make the internet more dangerous for young people, many of whom would ignore the ban.

Read more on Sky News:
Call to trial four-day week for teachers
Primary school tests ‘devastating’
AI to tackle truancy

Noah Jones, 15, co-plaintiff in a High Court case said a better plan would be “cutting off the bad things about social media”, adding, “I most likely will get around the ban. I know a lot of my mates will”.

UK campaigners have called for stronger policies to stop students using phones in schools, which already have the power to ban phones.

The CSJ wants to see smartphones banned in all schools “to break the 24-hour cycle of phone use”, and said a public health campaign is needed “to highlight the harms of social media”.

Last week Health Secretary Wes Streeting said he worries “about the mind-numbing impact of doomscrolling on social media on young minds and our neurodevelopment”.

Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces says it has captured Babanusa, a transport junction in the south of the country, just a month after the fall of Al Fashir to the same group.

The RSF said in a statement the seizure of the city in West Kordofan state came as it repelled “a surprise attack” by the Sudanese army in what it called “a clear violation of the humanitarian truce”.

The paramilitary group added it had “liberated” the city in the state, which has become the latest frontline in the war in Sudan.

It comes just over a month after the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) withdrew from military positions in the heart of Al Fashir, the capital of North Darfur, and the symbolic site was captured by the RSF with no resistance.

The RSF claimed at the time it had taken over the city and completed its military control of the Darfur region, where the administration of former US president Joe Biden has accused the group of committing genocide.

The war between the Sudanese army and the RSF – who were once allies – started in Khartoum in April 2023 but has spread across the country.

About 12 million people are believed to have been displaced and at least 40,000 killed in the civil war, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) – but aid groups say the true death toll could be far greater.

Tom Fletcher, the UN’s under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, recently told Sky’s The World With Yalda Hakim the situation was “horrifying”.

“It’s utterly grim right now – it’s the epicentre of suffering in the world,” he said of Sudan.

Read more:
Tens of thousands killed in two days in Sudan city
Sudan’s war: Is it a genocide?

The United States, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Saudi Arabia – known as the Quad – earlier in November proposed a plan for a three-month truce followed by peace talks.

The RSF responded by saying it had accepted the plan, but soon after attacked army territory with a barrage of drone strikes.

Nicolas Maduro has said Venezuelans are ready to defend their country as the US considers a land attack.

The president held a rally in Caracas amid heightened tensions with Donald Trump’s administration, which has been targeting what it says are boats carrying drug smugglers.

Mr Trump met his national security team on Monday evening, having warned last week that land strikes would start “very soon”.

It’s not been confirmed what was discussed at the meeting, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters: “There’s many options at the president’s disposal that are on the table – and I’ll let him speak on those.”

US forces have carried out at least 21 strikes on boats it claims were carrying narcotics to its shores over the last few months, and the White House has accused Mr Maduro of being involved in the drugs trade – a claim he denies.

‘Psychological terrorism’

Mr Maduro – widely considered a dictator by the West – said on Monday that Venezuelans are ready “to defend [the country] and lead it to the path of peace”.

“We have lived through 22 weeks of aggression that can only be described as psychological terrorism,” he said.

Venezuela has said the boat attacks, which have killed more than 80 people, amount to murder – and that Mr Trump’s true motivation is to oust Mr Maduro and access its oil.

Concerns have been raised over the legality of the US attacks, which the Pentagon has sought to justify by designating the gangs as foreign terror organisations.

Controversy over US strikes

Tensions remain high over America’s large deployment in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific, which includes its flagship aircraft carrier and thousands of troops.

The US has released videos of boats being blown up but has not provided evidence – such as photos of drugs – to support the smuggling claims.

Controversy also surrounds the first incident, on 2 September, in which 11 people were killed – with a follow-up strike targeting the boat after the first attack left two survivors in the water.

US media reported defence secretary Pete Hegseth gave an order that everyone on board should be killed.

However, there are concerns about the legality of the second strike if the survivors posed no threat.

Mr Hegseth dismissed the reporting as “fake news” and insisted all actions in the region are compliant with US and international law.

“Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization,” he said on X.

Mr Trump said on Sunday he would not have wanted a second strike and that Mr Hegseth had denied giving such an order.

Ms Leavitt confirmed on Monday that the boat had been hit by a second strike – but denied Mr Hegseth gave the order for the follow-up.

Instead, she said he had authorised US navy vice admiral Frank Bradley to attack, and the admiral acted “well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the US was eliminated”.

Read more from Sky News:
Hong Kong fire: 13 arrested as death toll hits 151
More than 1,100 confirmed dead in Asia floods

As the US weighs its next steps, Mr Trump said on Sunday he had spoken to Mr Maduro by phone and that the conversation went neither “well or badly”.

In recent days, he also stated that Venezuela’s airspace should be considered closed – with the South American nation calling it a “colonial threat” and “illegal, and unjustified aggression”.