Children’s social media curbs planned across EU, von der Leyen says ⁠58%

By No Author⁠44%

7/13/2026, 5:46:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Negativity Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 24.7% saturation with 76 hits. Analysis detected 564 faulty-reasoning hits from 308 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (9,359 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.20% of the article peer group.

BRUSSELS - The European Union will move to limit young children’s access to social media across the 27-member bloc, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Monday, in what would be the biggest such ​effort to date to guard against online dangers. 
Von der Leyen ‌presented ‌a paper from two experts recommending a tiered ​approach, with under-13s only allowed to use social media for limited periods under the supervision of parents, caregivers and teachers. 
The ⁠curbs would be lifted gradually as teenagers got older. 
“It is clear we ⁠need age-appropriate restrictions to platforms,” von der Leyen told reporters in Brussels. 
“The question is no longer ​if children face risks online, but ⁠what can we do to give children a safer start online,” she said. 
Von der ⁠Leyen indicated that ​she was likely to follow the experts’ suggestions ​and that the Commission would present a concrete proposal ​after ‌the summer. 
She is expected to announce it at her state of the union address in September. 
Australia, Britain, China, India and the United States have already imposed a ‌social media ban or are considering one, which would mainly target TikTok, Alphabet’s YouTube and Meta’s Instagram and Facebook. 
Those companies did not immediately respond to emailed requests for comment. 
Social media platforms have ​said ​they have measures to protect younger users and ​many have already imposed age restrictions. 
“We first need to consider the ⁠type of platforms that are harmful to our children. 
The evidence shows that this is mainly social media platforms, but also other providers with age-inappropriate and addictive features. 
So ​think of it as social media plus,” von der Leyen said. 
“And when we have this clearly defined category, I believe we need to consider phased and gradual access for different age ranges,” she added. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.4%No Author: 3.2%The Japan Times: 3.5%Confirmation Bias11.4%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.6%The Japan Times: 1.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%No Author: 3.9%The Japan Times: 4.7%Availability Heuristic10.1%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.0%The Japan Times: 1.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.2%The Japan Times: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%No Author: 1.6%The Japan Times: 2.0%Overconfidence Bias7.8%This article: 3.2%No Author: 11.2%The Japan Times: 14.4%Framing Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.4%The Japan Times: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.2%No Author: 0.8%The Japan Times: 1.3%Status Quo Bias6.2%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.1%The Japan Times: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 4.7%The Japan Times: 4.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%No Author: 2.4%The Japan Times: 3.3%Pessimism Bias4.9%This article: 22.1%No Author: 9.6%The Japan Times: 11.6%Negativity Bias22.1%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.0%The Japan Times: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.7%The Japan Times: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.3%The Japan Times: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.1%The Japan Times: 1.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.4%The Japan Times: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.8%The Japan Times: 1.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 1.9%The Japan Times: 2.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.7%The Japan Times: 0.9%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.1%The Japan Times: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.2%The Japan Times: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.1%The Japan Times: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.7%No Author: 4.8%The Japan Times: 5.5%Appeal to Authority24.7%This article: 7.8%No Author: 1.0%The Japan Times: 1.7%False Dilemma7.8%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.6%The Japan Times: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 7.8%No Author: 0.2%The Japan Times: 0.2%Circular Reasoning7.8%This article: 0.0%No Author: 3.0%The Japan Times: 4.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.3%The Japan Times: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.7%The Japan Times: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 3.6%The Japan Times: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 5.2%No Author: 0.7%The Japan Times: 0.9%Begging the Question5.2%This article: 0.0%No Author: 3.4%The Japan Times: 4.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.6%The Japan Times: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 10.1%No Author: 0.2%The Japan Times: 0.2%Composition/Division10.1%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.7%The Japan Times: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.9%No Author: 2.3%The Japan Times: 3.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.9%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.1%The Japan Times: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.1%The Japan Times: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.0%The Japan Times: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 24.0%No Author: 5.3%The Japan Times: 4.6%Unattributed Quote24.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 2.1%The Japan Times: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 15.3%No Author: 6.3%The Japan Times: 9.0%Biased Writer Voice15.3%This article: 7.8%No Author: 1.4%The Japan Times: 1.6%Indoctrination7.8%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.3%The Japan Times: 0.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.2%The Japan Times: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%No Author: 0.3%The Japan Times: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

308 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker69%attributed speech97writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 44 words • 0.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 16 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 24 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 15 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 19 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 12 words • 100.0% coverageUrsula von der Leyen • 24 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ursula von der Leyen

100%flagged-word coverage
211 attributed words100% of attributed speech62% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Unattributed Quote+35.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ursula von der Leyen: 35.1%35.1%Biased Writer Voice-6.3 ptsWriter: 19.6%Ursula von der Leyen: 13.3%13.3%Indoctrination+11.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ursula von der Leyen: 11.4%11.4%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.