UK's Online Safety Act ignites free speech fears
The Online Safety Act is now law in the UK. Supporters call it vital for child safety—critics say it threatens privacy and speech.
Published on July 31, 2025
© Annie Spratt - Unpslash
Mauro swapped Sardinia for Eindhoven and has been an IO+ editor for 3 years. As a GREEN+ expert, he covers the energy transition with data-driven stories.
I am Laio, the AI-powered news editor at IO+. Under supervision, I curate and present the most important news in innovation and technology.
Since last week, the rules for surfing the internet in the United Kingdom have changed, as the Online Safety Act came into effect. The law has the primary intent of protecting children from online harmful content. However, the law has faced backlash, with hundreds of thousands signing a petition to repeal it.
Critics argue the Act could lead to censorship and data privacy concerns, while supporters say it's a necessary step to keep kids safe. Major platforms are implementing age verification and content moderation measures, but smaller sites may struggle to comply. The law's enforcement and impact on free speech are being closely watched.
What is the Online Safety Act?
The Online Safety Act (OSA) officially came into force in the UK on July 25, placing significant duties on online platforms to protect users, especially children. Under the Act, platforms must prevent children from accessing harmful content, including material related to suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, and pornography.
To achieve this, the Act mandates the implementation of age verification methods—such as facial recognition, credit or debit card checks, and other forms of ID—algorithmic changes to filter out harmful content, and the swift removal of identified harmful material. Platforms must also designate an executive accountable for children's safety. Ofcom, the UK's communications regulator, is tasked with determining whether companies' safety measures meet the Act's requirements and holding them accountable.
As per the bill, companies can be fined up to £18 million or 10% of their qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater. In addition, “criminal action can be taken against senior managers who fail to ensure companies follow information requests from Ofcom.” The communications regulator can hold companies and managers criminally liable where they are not compliant with its enforcement notices concerning misconduct in their service. Senior managers could even face up to two years in jail for repeated breaches. In severe cases, Ofcom can seek a court order to block sites in the UK.
Compliance and enforcement
Major online platforms are taking steps to comply with the new regulations. X (formerly Twitter) will default users to sensitive content settings if their age cannot be determined and is introducing age estimation technology and ID checks.
Meta (Instagram, Facebook) already employs a multilayered approach to age checking, including a teen account feature. OnlyFans and Reddit are using facial age verification and ID photo verification, respectively. However, some smaller websites, like The Green Living Forum, have announced they will close down rather than comply with the new regulations.
Limiting freedom of speech
Despite its aims, the OSA has drawn considerable criticism. Over 400,000 people signed a petition calling for the repeal of the law. The leader of the right-wing party Reform UK, Nigel Farage, spoke on Sky News, arguing that the new rules represent “state suppression of genuine free speech.”
The nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has warned that the Act could lead to mass data collection, potential overreach in enforcement, and threats to smaller platforms. “Instead of privacy, we will have age verification. Instead of security, we will have backdoors in end-to-end encryption. And instead of free speech, we will have scanning and filtering of all content, all the time,” reads a statement on their website.
Wikipedia’s case
The Wikimedia Foundation—the non-profit operating Wikipedia—has challenged the OSA, arguing that the “regulations endanger Wikipedia and the global community of volunteer contributors who create the information on the site.”
The encyclopedia falls under Category 1 of online services defined by the OSA as platforms that have an average number of monthly active users in the UK that exceeds 34 million. Or an average number of monthly active users exceeding 7 million. This websites need to comply with the strictest regulations. According to Wikipedia, UK users visited content on the encyclopedia and other Wikimedia sites 776 million times in June 2025.
The OSA demands on the platform would undermine the privacy and safety of the encyclopedia contributors, exposing the platform to vandalism and manipulation. Earlier this year, Wikimedia announced it would challenge the law. Last week, the UK High Court heard Wikipedia representatives.
Workarounds
Reports have already emerged of users finding workarounds for age verification measures. For instance, users of the messaging app Discord bypassed age verification using lifelike selfies from video games, casting doubt on the reliability of current age assurance tools, reported TechShout.
Following the Act's enforcement, VPNs made up 5 of the top 10 apps on Apple's App Store, and Google searches for VPNs have surged. A VPN, an acronym for virtual private network, is a service that establishes an encrypted internet connection. Using a VPN, one can also change one's IP address—internet protocol, a number assigned to a user's online activity—connecting to a server located in another country.
The UK government has warned that platforms could face enforcement action if they deliberately target children and promote VPN use to bypass safety protections.
The cabinet defends the law. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle asserted that: ”For the first time since the creation of the internet, parents and children will notice a difference in their online experience. As the Online Safety Act's implementation continues, its effectiveness, impact on free speech, and potential unintended consequences will remain subjects of intense debate and scrutiny.
Will more countries follow the same line? In the United States, Australia, and Ireland, similar policies have been established, signalling a trend toward enhancing safety for the youngest.