It’s been reported that fears of Trump-era tariffs hitting Chinese imports have sparked a wave of iPhone upgrades, with Apple hoping to offset price pressures by ramping up production in India.

However, in a recent update (changing daily it seems!) the Trump administration has exempted smartphones and computers from the recently imposed tariffs, including the 10% global tariff and the 125% tariff on China. This exemption also extends to other electronics like memory cards, solar cells, and semiconductors.

iPhone Sales Surge as Tariff Panic Takes Hold

Just a short time after President Donald Trump announced sweeping new tariffs on Chinese imports, it seems Apple stores across the US have been reporting a noticeable spike in iPhone upgrades. The catalyst has been the concern that the cost of new devices could soon rise sharply if Apple’s supply chain takes a direct hit.

For example, retail staff in several major cities have reported that shoppers appear to be acting pre-emptively, prompted by growing speculation that this latest wave of tariffs could disrupt pricing sooner than expected.

Warning

Although Apple hasn’t announced any official price changes, analysts have warned that production costs for devices like the iPhone 16 Pro could jump by over $250 if Chinese-made components are hit with the full weight of Trump’s tariff package. For buyers, the risk isn’t just higher prices, but it’s also the possibility of deals and trade-in incentives vanishing overnight.

As Dan Ives, Managing Director at Wedbush Securities points out: “If Apple passes on the full tariff burden, we’re looking at iPhones retailing for over $2,000,” adding “That kind of pricing would be a major shock to the system—especially in the US market.”

What’s Actually Happening With The Tariffs?

At the time of writing this article (11.04.25), President Donald Trump announced a sweeping set of tariffs targeting Chinese-made goods as part of what he’s dubbed an economic “Liberation Day.” Under this new regime, levies on certain imports have reportedly surged to a cumulative 145 per cent, with electronics, including smartphones, firmly in the firing line.

For Apple, the timing couldn’t be worse. For example, around 90 per cent of iPhones are still assembled in China, and the prospect of such sharp increases in import costs has sent alarm bells ringing. Analysts now estimate that tariffs alone could push the production cost of a high-end iPhone 16 Pro Max from $1,199 to over $2,100 if passed on to consumers. Also, if Apple were ever forced to shift final assembly to the US, the price could skyrocket to as much as $3,500 per device, an outcome most observers still see as unrealistic but not entirely off the table.

While Trump has pointed to Apple’s $500 billion investment pledge as proof that iPhone manufacturing could be repatriated, the fine print appears to tell a different story. For example, most of that spending is expected to go toward R&D and AI infrastructure, not assembly lines. As things stand, it’s been reported that Apple’s short-term solution was to ramp up production in India and fly devices to the US by charter jet! That sounds like an expensive (and not very environmentally friendly) workaround, but one that avoids the full impact of the China tariffs for now.

Behind the scenes, Apple is also said to be lobbying for an exemption, similar to the one it secured during Trump’s first administration. However, with no guarantee of success and political rhetoric heating up, the company may have little choice but to start factoring the cost of tariffs into its consumer pricing, if not now, then very soon.

Why It’s Hitting Apple So Hard

Quite simply, no other tech company is as exposed to this tariff storm as Apple. The iPhone accounts for roughly half of the firm’s total revenue, and its China-based supply chain (centred around Foxconn’s vast factories) has long been central to its global dominance.

That exposure has seriously spooked investors. For example, Apple’s shares fell 19 per cent over just three days last week, marking the worst such dip for the company in nearly 25 years! The combination of supply chain vulnerability, investor nervousness and potential consumer backlash has sent shockwaves through both Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

What’s Apple Doing About It?

Apple hasn’t made any official comment on the situation at this point, but sources close to the company suggest it is already taking steps to reduce its reliance on Chinese manufacturing, most notably by perhaps ramping up production in India.

In fact, the Wall Street Journal recently reported that Apple plans to redirect a significant share of its India-assembled iPhones to the US market as a short-term fix. Although India faces a 26 per cent tariff under Trump’s new policy, that’s still roughly half that imposed on Chinese goods, thereby making it seem to be a more viable alternative.

Building In India

Thankfully for Apple, it has been building up its Indian manufacturing base since 2017, initially focusing on older models and gradually moving towards assembling newer ones like the iPhone 15 and 16. In fact, Bank of America estimates Apple could make around 25 million iPhones in India this year, enough to supply about 50 per cent of US demand if redirected accordingly!

That said, even the India solution looks like it may have its limits. For example, Vietnam, another key site for Apple products like AirPods and Apple Watches, was slapped with an eye-watering 46 per cent tariff under the new plan. Also, moving large-scale production out of China entirely remains logistically (and financially) daunting.

The situation has led some analysts to joke that if consumers want a $3,500 iPhone, they may as well be made in the US, e.g. New Jersey or Texas.

What This Means for Apple’s Business Model

The tariff crisis presents Apple with a tough choice, i.e. absorb the extra costs and watch its profit margins shrink, or pass them on to consumers and risk a backlash.

Analysts say even a 30 per cent increase in iPhone prices could dent demand significantly, especially in mature markets where upgrades are already slowing. For Apple, which prides itself on premium pricing and tight margins, the threat to its bottom line is very real.

Also, there’s the question of investor confidence. The recent stock slide may only be the beginning if fears grow that Apple can’t adapt its supply chain fast enough to avoid future trade tensions. While the company has pledged to invest $500 billion in US manufacturing over the next four years, analysts remain sceptical about how much of that will directly impact iPhone production.

As Neil Shah, Vice President of Research at Counterpoint says: “There’s no easy way out,” and “Even moving 10 per cent of Apple’s supply chain out of China could take years and cost tens of billions. This is going to test Apple’s entire global strategy.”

What About Business Customers and Competitors?

For Apple’s business clients, ranging from SMEs to global enterprises, rising device costs could become a major headache. Many companies operate under bulk hardware contracts, and an across-the-board rise in iPhone prices could hit IT budgets hard. Many business owners also fear losing some of the attractive offers and deals they’ve been used to in better times.

Meanwhile, Apple’s competitors are watching closely. For example, Samsung and Google, both of which produce more of their hardware outside of China, may find themselves in a stronger position if Apple is forced to hike prices. Devices that were once considered too costly or too niche may suddenly look more attractive to price-sensitive consumers and businesses alike.

Even if Apple manages to dodge the worst of the tariff fallout, the current frenzy may have already exposed a key vulnerability in its strategy, i.e. an over-reliance on a region now sitting at the centre of a deepening geopolitical divide. The next few months could redefine where and how Apple makes its most iconic product, and at what price.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Whether or not iPhone prices spike in the coming weeks, the sudden rush to upgrade tells us one thing i.e., consumer and investor confidence in global supply chains is far more fragile than it once seemed. For Apple, this tariff-driven panic has highlighted just how exposed it remains to international political swings, despite years of effort to diversify its manufacturing base.

For now, Apple’s (reported) strategy of flying in India-made iPhones to dodge China-focused tariffs might offer a temporary cushion. However, the scale and speed of Trump’s latest trade measures suggest that piecemeal solutions may no longer be enough. If production costs continue to rise, Apple may have little choice but to rethink both where it builds its devices and how it prices them, especially in core markets like the US, where consumer resistance to steep price hikes could quickly translate into lost sales.

For UK businesses, particularly those that issue iPhones through corporate mobile contracts or manage large device fleets, any upward shift in pricing could, of course, create budgetary pressure. Procurement cycles may, therefore, need to shorten, upgrade plans may be re-evaluated, and conversations around alternative suppliers could gain ground. With the whole tariff situation, supply chain disruption and global pricing volatility inevitably spill over, especially when the product in question is as globally embedded as the iPhone.

Meanwhile, rivals like Samsung and Google may be able to gain a little ground, though not without their own challenges. Samsung, for example, relies heavily on production in Vietnam, which has also been hit with a 46 per cent tariff under Trump’s new plan. Even so, with a more diversified supply chain and broader pricing range, these competitors may still appeal to businesses and consumers looking for more flexible or less exposed alternatives.

Apple, for all its brand loyalty, is facing a moment of reckoning, not just on pricing, but on the sustainability and resilience of its entire business model. What began as a tariff story may, therefore, trigger a much deeper shift in the balance of power across the global tech landscape.

In this Tech Insight, we look at Microsoft’s newly promoted set of seven Windows 11 tips—designed to help users get more from the operating system ahead of Windows 10’s looming end-of-life deadline.

Hoping To Smooth The Upgrade Path

With support for Windows 10 set to end on 14 October 2025, Microsoft is stepping up efforts to showcase the benefits of its newer Windows 11 OS. The latest push is all about encouraging users to explore Windows 11’s built-in features, from multitasking tools to biometric login, in the hope of smoothing the upgrade path and unlocking better everyday experiences.

For businesses, these seven tips may seem minor at first glance but, taken together, they may be seen to reflect a growing emphasis on usability, focus, and personalisation. These are traits that can support productivity and security across both office and remote work environments.

So, what exactly are the tips, and what value do they offer?

1. Make the Start Menu Your Own

Microsoft’s first tip focuses on the Start Menu, which has shifted from its traditional left-hand corner to a sleek, centralised layout in Windows 11. The company recommends personalising it by pinning frequently used apps, rearranging shortcuts, and resizing tiles to suit individual workflows.

For organisations standardising device setups across teams, this functionality allows for cleaner, more consistent interfaces, thereby helping users find what they need faster.

Adopting this tip could improve navigation efficiency and can be customised to match common app usage per role or department.

2. Master Snap Layouts for Multitasking

Snap Layouts allow users to arrange multiple apps and windows on-screen with ease. Hovering over the maximise button reveals several layout options, such as side-by-side or grid views.

This is particularly useful for professionals working across several platforms simultaneously, e.g. spreadsheets, emails, browsers, and collaboration tools.

This tip could have value in reducing screen clutter and enhancing productivity for multi-tasking roles, even on single-display setups.

3. Create a Desktop for Every Project

Windows 11 supports multiple desktops, allowing users to group open apps and documents by task or project. For example, one desktop can house a user’s day-to-day admin work, while another holds presentations or creative tools.

Switching between desktops is as simple as pressing Windows + Tab, offering a smooth way to stay organised, especially in project-based roles or client-facing work.

This tip could help users maintain context and stay focused across varied workstreams without overwhelming a single workspace.

4. Use Widgets to Stay Updated

Widgets provide a snapshot of useful updates like weather, news, calendar appointments, and task lists, all accessible via a swipe or the Windows + W shortcut.

Microsoft pitches this as a way to streamline day-to-day information needs without opening multiple apps. Users can customise what they see and remove any widgets they don’t need.

Making more use of widgets could be ideal for quick, on-the-go updates, particularly for team members juggling schedules, appointments, or news-based roles.

5. Use Focus Sessions to Minimise Distraction

Focus Sessions, found within the Clock app, allow users to set structured time blocks for concentrated work. They sync with Microsoft To Do and reduce notifications during each timed session.

This tip supports better time management, encouraging workers to break large tasks into manageable chunks and avoid common distractions.

Using Focus Sessions could encourage better concentration habits and support mental well-being, particularly in hybrid or home-based settings.

6. Log In with Windows Hello

Windows Hello replaces passwords with biometric authentication e.g., facial recognition or fingerprint scanning, provided the device supports it.

Microsoft highlights this as a faster, more secure login method that also cuts down on password fatigue and reduces the risk of compromised credentials.

Using Windows Hello could strengthen endpoint security, simplify login workflows, and reduce password-related support issues, all of which could be of real value to businesses.

7. Enable Dark Mode for Comfort

Although it may sound like it, Dark Mode isn’t just a design choice, but is actually a feature designed to reduce eye strain, especially in low-light settings or during extended screen use. Windows 11 offers a system-wide toggle under Personalisation settings.

Users working late or on portable devices may find Dark Mode more comfortable, helping to reduce visual fatigue.

Using Dark Mode could actually improve long-term comfort for screen-heavy roles and can reduce energy consumption on OLED displays.

Why These Tips Matter

Together, these seven tips could be seen to demonstrate how Windows 11 is evolving beyond just a visual upgrade. They highlight Microsoft’s efforts to align the OS with modern working needs, prioritising comfort, personalisation, and smarter workflows.

For IT managers and business leaders, they also present an opportunity to:

– Improve the onboarding experience for new Windows 11 users.

– Drive better day-to-day productivity through built-in tools.

– Strengthen device-level security with passwordless login.

– Encourage healthier digital habits across teams.

The key here is raising awareness, i.e. while these tips are all native to the operating system, few are actively promoted during setup, and many users still don’t explore them fully without guidance.

Not Without Challenges

Despite Microsoft’s efforts, for many people the road to better Windows 11 adoption isn’t entirely smooth.

For example, while some features, like Snap Layouts and Focus Sessions, are underused simply because users don’t know they exist, others (such as Windows Hello) require compatible hardware that may not be standard across all fleets. Also, while personalisation is encouraged, a lack of training or policy guidance could lead to inconsistent user experiences.

There’s also the broader challenge of change management. Businesses still on Windows 10 may face staff resistance to visual shifts like the central Start Menu or the introduction of widgets. Without clear benefits being communicated, users may default to old habits or disable new tools entirely.

For organisations managing hybrid or remote teams, this could mean greater emphasis on setup guides, onboarding materials, and hands-on support during the transition.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Microsoft’s seven tips serve as a reminder that Windows 11 isn’t just about aesthetics, but is also about functionality, productivity, and preparing users for a more flexible, digital-first way of working. The operating system is already packed with features designed to make daily tasks easier and more secure, but these benefits only actually materialise when users know where to find them and feel confident using them.

For UK businesses in particular, the timing matters. With the Windows 10 support deadline fast approaching, organisations are under pressure to modernise their desktop environments without causing unnecessary disruption. If applied well, Microsoft’s tips could ease that transition, helping teams get to grips with new interfaces and routines more quickly. In hybrid and remote contexts, where consistency and self-sufficiency are key, small gains in usability and performance can translate into real operational value.

That said, the success of this guidance will depend heavily on how well it’s communicated, not just by Microsoft, but by IT teams, MSPs, and internal champions. Raising awareness is one thing but embedding new habits across diverse user groups is another. Businesses that invest in upfront user education, clear setup protocols, and device standardisation will be better placed to unlock the full value of Windows 11’s toolset.

For Microsoft, this latest push is both practical and strategic. By encouraging users to make the most of what’s already under the hood, it positions Windows 11 as a platform that’s ready for the future, not just a necessary upgrade, but a smarter way to work. Whether that message sticks will depend on how well the tech is backed by real-world support, and whether users can see clear advantages in making the switch. For now, the tools are there – it’s just a question of how many take the time to use them.

A judge has ruled that the UK government’s legal dispute with Apple over encrypted data access must be heard in public, rejecting claims that secrecy was needed for national security reasons.

The Encryption Battle That Spilled Into the Open

At the heart of this case is Apple’s Advanced Data Protection (ADP) system, a tool designed to give users enhanced privacy by encrypting their iCloud data so only they, and not even Apple, can access it. However, that level of security put the tech giant on a collision course with the UK Home Office.

Earlier this year, the government issued a Technical Capability Notice under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), demanding that Apple give law enforcement access to data protected by ADP. The move, described by campaigners as a call for a “backdoor,” would have allowed the government to access not just British users’ files, but potentially data from global users as well.

Apple responded by pulling ADP from the UK entirely in February and launching a legal challenge in March, but not before a flurry of criticism from privacy groups and US lawmakers.

The UK government then attempted to have the case heard in secret, claiming even acknowledging the existence of the proceedings could harm national security. However, in the latest development in this matter, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal has issued a sharp rebuttal.

Open Justice Wins (For Now)

In its published ruling, the tribunal said it would be “a truly extraordinary step” to conduct a hearing in total secrecy without even acknowledging that a hearing was happening at all.

“For the reasons that are set out in our private judgement, we do not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security,” the tribunal added.

While it’s still possible that parts of future hearings could be held behind closed doors, the decision sets a clear precedent, i.e. that legal disputes with wide-ranging implications for the public shouldn’t be kept out of sight.

Why Does This Matter So Much?

Far from being just a symbolic move, Apple’s decision to withdraw ADP from the UK had real-world consequences for businesses, particularly those relying on Apple’s ecosystem to handle sensitive information. For example, Apple’s ADP offers end-to-end encryption for iCloud data, meaning that not even Apple can decrypt the contents. That includes files like:

– Business documents stored in iCloud Drive.

– Notes containing intellectual property.

– Photos, messages, and device backups.

For firms that operate internationally, ADP is, therefore, a vital part of their data security posture. Without it, UK-based businesses are now left with fewer tools to protect critical data, a point that hasn’t gone unnoticed in the cybersecurity industry.

Worse still, the idea of a government demanding backdoor access could push other vendors to either reduce their own security standards to comply, or retreat from UK markets altogether.

A Chilling Message to the Tech Sector?

Apple has consistently maintained a firm stance against building any form of backdoor or master key into its products or services. The company has long argued that such mechanisms would undermine user trust and pose unacceptable security risks, not just to individuals but to broader digital infrastructure. Apple has been keen to stress that, despite pressure, such as from the UK government, it remains committed to offering its customers the highest level of data protection. Also, while the ADP feature has been removed from the UK for now, Apple has signalled that it hopes to reintroduce it in the future, but only if it can do so without compromising on its encryption standards.

For now, therefore, it seems clear that Apple will not alter ADP to satisfy the UK government’s demands, even though other tech firms, particularly smaller vendors, might struggle to resist such orders or afford lengthy legal battles.

If the Home Office ultimately prevails in its attempt to force Apple’s hand, it could pave the way for future notices targeting other encrypted services. That’s caused alarm among privacy experts, who warn that the UK could become a test bed for surveillance-friendly legislation.

Privacy Advocates Applaud the Ruling

Groups like Open Rights Group, Big Brother Watch, and Index on Censorship, who intervened to oppose secret proceedings, have welcomed the tribunal’s stance.

“This is bigger than the UK and Apple,” said Jim Killock, executive director of Open Rights Group. “The Court’s judgment will have implications for the privacy and security of millions of people around the world.”

Big Brother Watch’s interim director Rebecca Vincent was even more direct, saying: “The Home Office’s order to break encryption represents a massive attack on the privacy rights of millions of British Apple users, which is a matter of significant public interest and must not be considered behind closed doors.”

Also, Privacy International has added that decisions “affecting the privacy and security of billions of people globally should be open to legal challenge in the most transparent way possible”.

National Security and Civil Liberties

As for the UK Home Office, it maintains that its priority is to “keep people safe” and insists the powers in question are tightly targeted and subject to judicial oversight, i.e. that it is not seeking blanket access to user data.

For example, as a Home Office spokesperson was recently quoted as saying: “There are longstanding and targeted investigatory powers that allow the authorities to investigate terrorists, paedophiles and the most serious criminals,” and they “are subject to robust safeguards including judicial authorisations and oversight to protect people’s privacy.”

Not Just Governments To Worry About

However, critics argue that demanding access to encrypted systems, especially those which don’t even allow the vendor to unlock data, could weaken security for everyone. Once a backdoor exists, they warn, it’s not just governments who might exploit it. Cybercriminals, hostile nation-states, and rogue insiders could all potentially discover or gain access to such vulnerabilities, thereby turning a tool meant for law enforcement into a global security risk. History has shown that even tightly controlled security features can leak or be reverse-engineered, making backdoors an attractive target for attackers looking to access sensitive personal, corporate, or state-level data.

Ripple Effects for Tech, Trust and Trade

This dispute has already triggered broader conversations about how democratic governments balance national security with digital rights. It has also raised fresh concerns about the UK’s post-Brexit regulatory environment, especially for tech companies deciding whether to invest or offer full services in the country. For example:

– Messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal, which also use end-to-end encryption, have previously threatened to exit the UK market if forced to compromise security.

– International businesses may reassess how they handle data belonging to UK users if privacy protections appear weaker.

– Cybersecurity vendors could find themselves caught between compliance obligations and user trust.

In short, the ruling that this case must be public is just one chapter in a much bigger battle, and one that could shape the future of encrypted technology, digital trade, and civil liberties in the UK and beyond.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The tribunal’s decision to reject secrecy in the Apple case upholds the principle of open justice in matters where both privacy and state power are at stake. Many may say that’s not just a win for transparency, but it also sets a precedent that future legal efforts to reshape the digital privacy landscape must be exposed to public scrutiny.

For UK businesses, the implications are immediate and practical. Many rely on Apple’s secure ecosystem to manage client data, protect sensitive communications, and comply with international privacy standards. Without access to features like ADP, these organisations may now face greater exposure to cyber risks, along with legal and reputational complications when dealing with overseas clients or partners. The uncertainty surrounding encryption standards could also force some firms to rethink their digital strategies altogether, particularly those in regulated sectors like law, finance, or healthcare.

There are also broader questions around competitiveness. If the UK is perceived as an outlier in how it treats encryption, global tech firms may respond by limiting product availability, delaying security updates, or withdrawing features altogether, steps we’ve already seen with Apple. Smaller tech providers may lack the resources to fight back, thereby making them more likely to comply or exit the market, potentially skewing the playing field and reducing the range of secure digital services available to UK consumers and businesses alike.

Also, privacy and civil liberties groups see the ruling as a crucial moment in defending end-to-end encryption, not just as a technical measure, but as a fundamental right. Their argument is that breaking encryption doesn’t just weaken the security of criminals, it weakens it for everyone. As governments around the world watch this case unfold, the UK risks becoming a proving ground for policies that could reshape how digital rights are protected (or compromised) for decades to come.

While this ruling keeps the spotlight on the Apple-Home Office standoff, the underlying conflict is far from resolved. As the case continues through the courts, the balance between public safety, privacy, and corporate responsibility will remain under intense scrutiny. For now, what’s clear is that encryption has become more than just a technical debate, i.e., it’s essentially a litmus test for how the UK defines trust, accountability, and digital sovereignty in a rapidly evolving world.

Meta is introducing stricter controls on how teenagers interact with its apps – including new parental permissions for Instagram and an expanded rollout of Teen Accounts to Facebook and Messenger.

More Built-In Restrictions for Younger Teens

Meta’s Teen Accounts are getting tougher. Originally launched in September 2024 for Instagram, these accounts are designed to give 13 to 15-year-olds a more protected experience by default. Now, new restrictions are being layered on top, and the whole setup is expanding to Facebook and Messenger for the first time.

Teen Accounts come with a suite of safety-first settings, i.e. private profiles, stricter content filters, overnight notification pauses, and limited messaging capabilities. Teens can’t be messaged by strangers, and they get reminders to step away from the app after an hour. So far, Meta says the changes have been well-received, with a reported 97 per cent of younger teens sticking to the default restrictions.

However, with growing pressure from regulators, charities and concerned parents, Meta says it’s now raising the bar even further.

Stricter Limits on Live Streaming and Messages

The biggest headline change is that teens under 16 will now need a parent’s permission to go live on Instagram. Meta says this is in response to widespread concerns from parents about the risks of strangers watching (or contacting) their children in real time.

There’s also a clampdown on direct messages. For example, Instagram’s existing tool to blur suspected nude images in DMs will remain on by default, and teens under 16 won’t be able to turn it off without a parent’s sign-off.

These updates are due to roll out in the coming months. According to Meta, the aim is to “give parents more peace of mind across Meta apps” and strengthen the platform’s age-appropriate protections.

Coming to Facebook and Messenger

Until now, Teen Accounts were exclusive to Instagram but, from this week, it seems that Facebook and Messenger will be joining the club.

For example, teen users in the UK, US, Australia and Canada will be automatically moved into Teen Accounts, with more countries to follow soon. Much like Instagram, the Facebook and Messenger versions will restrict who can interact with young users, limit what kind of content they see, and introduce features to encourage healthy screen time habits.

Mock-up screenshots released by Meta show Facebook users receiving alerts that their account will soon become a Teen Account, along with messaging prompts like “Soon your settings will be updated automatically to protect you from unwanted contact.”

This shift is part of Meta’s broader attempt to create a consistent safety experience across its ecosystem, but it also hints at a more strategic goal, i.e. heading off regulation by acting before governments step in.

Regulation, Reputation and Parental Pressure

This latest move by Meta is, therefore, being motivated by a mix of factors, the main ones being:

– Public and political scrutiny intensifying. For example, in the UK, the Online Safety Act now legally requires platforms to prevent children from encountering harmful and illegal content. Failing to do so could land companies like Meta with serious consequences from Ofcom, which now holds enforcement powers.

– Meta has faced reputational damage for years over teen safety, from whistleblower claims about Instagram’s impact on teenage mental health to reports of underage users being served inappropriate content by the algorithm.

– Meta appears to be really listening to parents. A recent Ipsos survey commissioned by the company found that 94 per cent of US parents believe Teen Accounts are helpful. The company says these accounts were created “with parents in mind,” and the latest changes respond to their most common worries, particularly around unwanted contact and exposure to sensitive content.

Critics Say It’s Not Enough – or Still Too Vague

Despite the PR-friendly messaging, not everyone is convinced. For example, campaigners have argued that Meta still hasn’t proven whether Teen Accounts are actually making a difference. Some have commented on the apparent silence from Mark Zuckerberg about the effectiveness of Teen Accounts and have questioned whether teens are still being algorithmically recommended harmful content – something Meta hasn’t publicly clarified.

Matthew Sowemimo, head of child safety policy at the NSPCC, has welcomed the new measures but stressed that they must be paired with proactive content moderation. In his words, “dangerous content shouldn’t be there in the first place.”

There are also some concerns about enforcement. For example, Teen Accounts depend heavily on users being honest about their age, but Ofcom research suggests 22 per cent of 8 to 17-year-olds claim to be over 18 on social media platforms. Meta has said it’s working on that, using AI tools and video selfies to better verify age, but even that raises its own ethical questions.

Some other critics have argued that Meta should take more responsibility anyway for its data-driven commercialised practices, which essentially control young users’ experiences on Meta’s social platforms.

What Are Other Platforms Doing?

Meta isn’t alone in having to respond to several sources of pressure on this issue. Examples of other platforms taking similar measures (for similar reasons) include:

– Online platform for creating and playing user-generated games, Roblox, which has recently introduced new parental controls that allow parents to block individual games or experiences.

– YouTube and TikTok have both added time limits and privacy defaults for teen users, though their approaches differ in terms of enforcement and transparency.

That said, it seems that (too) few platforms have rolled out something as broad as Teen Accounts across multiple services. This move could represent a kind of rebalancing in the social media landscape, where platforms are now vying to be seen as the safest environment for young users, not just the most addictive. However, questions remain over how effectively any system can block determined teens from sidestepping restrictions.

What This Means for Parents, Platforms and the Public

The expansion of Teen Accounts appears to be a signal that Meta is taking the issue of online safety more seriously – or at least wants to be seen as doing so.

For parents, it offers a more unified, manageable set of controls across Instagram, Facebook and Messenger. For regulators, it may buy Meta some goodwill, though it doesn’t exempt the company from scrutiny. Also, for competitors, it may set a new benchmark in platform-wide teen protections.

That said, as with all digital safety initiatives, the effectiveness will depend on execution, transparency, and the company’s willingness to be held accountable. Some may say that whether this is a genuine shift or just another layer of corporate risk management remains to be seen.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For a company often accused of doing too little, too late, this multi-app expansion suggests a more joined-up approach to protecting younger users. However, it also highlights the growing complexities in balancing child safety with platform growth, user freedom, and commercial goals.

The scale and scope of the changes, from parental controls on live streaming to AI-led age verification, appear to indicate that Meta is serious about creating a more ring-fenced space for teens. However, it remains to be seen whether these technical safeguards will hold up in practice. After all, digital workarounds are nothing new for today’s tech-savvy teenagers, and critics are right to question the real-world impact without full transparency on outcomes and data.

UK businesses in the digital and tech space should be paying close attention. As regulation like the Online Safety Act continues to tighten, the onus on companies to demonstrate proactive, meaningful protections will only increase. Platforms offering youth-focused content or services may now face growing pressure to match, or even exceed, what Meta is implementing. For agencies and developers, this could mean rethinking how parental consent, privacy defaults and content moderation are built into products from day one – not just bolted on later.

Meanwhile, parents may feel some relief from the growing consistency across Meta’s apps, but they shouldn’t be left holding the reins alone. As experts have pointed out, it’s not enough for tech firms to hand families the tools – they also need to take responsibility for the ecosystem they’ve built, including the algorithms and engagement models that still shape user experiences behind the scenes.

It seems, therefore, that the introduction of stricter Teen Account controls is a step in the right direction, but whether it sets a new gold standard or simply buys Meta more breathing room will depend on what comes next. For now, the move raises the bar, but also the questions.

WhatsApp users are pushing back against the forced rollout of Meta’s new AI chatbot, which appears in the app without warning and offers no option to disable it.

Forced AI Integration Leaves Users Fuming

Meta AI, a chatbot integrated into WhatsApp, is being promoted as a virtual assistant that can answer questions and spark ideas, but its uninvited arrival has triggered an outcry. The feature is currently being rolled out in the UK and other countries, where it appears as a glowing blue circle in the search bar or activates when users type “@Meta AI” in chats or groups.

While Meta describes it as a helpful tool powered by its Llama language models, users have taken to social media to voice their frustration. For example, one X user compared the experience to “getting a clingy new roommate”, while another branded it “the most pointless and irritating AI integration into an app so far”. Others said they were switching platforms entirely because of Meta AI.

No Off Switch – And No Clear Explanation

A key frustration appears to be the inability to opt out. Meta has not provided any settings to turn the feature off or hide it, and it hasn’t addressed why users weren’t given the choice. For many, the lack of transparency and consent is as troubling as the AI itself.

It’s been reported that some users have tried switching to WhatsApp Business to avoid the chatbot, and while some appear to have been successful, others have said the blue circle still appears. This inconsistency has also added to the confusion, and Meta has yet to confirm whether WhatsApp Business will remain AI-free.

Other Platforms Too

It seems this isn’t an isolated experiment. For example, Meta AI is being pushed across multiple platforms including Facebook and Instagram, as part of Meta’s wider vision to integrate generative AI into everyday digital interactions. In the UK, it first appeared in Facebook Messenger in late 2024 and is now slowly extending into WhatsApp.

Some Users Say It’s Unhelpful and Intrusive

Beyond the issue of consent, it seems that many simply don’t find Meta AI useful. The chatbot often triggers when users are trying to search for chats or contacts, getting in the way rather than helping. This has left some disgruntled users describing it as “overkill” while others have expressed frustration about being perfectly capable of writing their own messages and not needing AI to write for them.

There also appears to be some scepticism over the chatbot’s actual utility. For example, early testers have reported that the responses are basic, repetitive, and in some cases completely irrelevant. Also, unlike standalone tools like ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini, Meta AI appears hardwired into an app many people use for private and professional communication.

Implications

For businesses that rely on WhatsApp, including customer service teams, delivery firms, and sole traders, the sudden appearance of an unremovable chatbot could create real problems. For example, if a customer sees the AI button and assumes it’s part of the company’s service, they might expect human responses that never arrive. Similarly, internal teams using WhatsApp for logistics or support may be distracted by or accidentally trigger the feature.

The bigger concern, though, may be around trust. For example, businesses increasingly choose platforms based on reliability, privacy, and user control. By pushing AI into WhatsApp without consent or clear controls, Meta perhaps risks undermining that trust, especially among SMEs and regulated industries where transparency and data protection matter.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

If your business uses WhatsApp to communicate with customers or colleagues, now’s the time to take a closer look at how Meta AI could impact your workflows. The feature might not seem disruptive at first glance, but confusion, miscommunication, or reputational damage could follow if customers or employees don’t understand how it works, or who’s really responding.

Meta’s AI push may be part of a long-term strategy to embed generative tools across its ecosystem, but this backlash shows that users expect more control over how and when they engage with AI. For now, switching to WhatsApp Business might delay the issue but it’s unlikely to be a permanent fix.

In the longer term, this controversy highlights a bigger shift in how users relate to everyday platforms. AI might be coming whether we like it or not but the question is whether companies like Meta will give us a say in how it’s deployed and used.

Microsoft has quietly reintroduced its controversial Recall feature in the Windows 11 Release Preview channel for Copilot+ PCs, ahead of a broader launch in 2025.

Recall uses AI to take automatic screenshots every few seconds, storing them locally so users can search their screen history using natural language. It’s pitched as a time-saving tool, but one that effectively logs everything viewed on a PC.

The feature was shelved in 2024 after strong backlash from security experts and privacy advocates. Critics warned that Recall could capture sensitive data, like passwords or private messages, that may be exposed if a device is compromised.

Microsoft now says Recall is opt-in, requires Windows Hello authentication, and stores data locally without sharing it with Microsoft or third parties. Users can pause, delete, or switch it off at any time.

Despite these safeguards, experts say the feature still poses risks, including data leaks and privacy issues affecting others whose information is captured without consent.

To stay secure, businesses should disable Recall unless essential, enforce strong authentication, and train staff on privacy risks, especially when deploying Copilot+ devices.