UK MPs propose changes to the UK's Online Safety Bill, including adding more offenses and fines, mandating tech firms appoint a “safety controller”, and more
New criminal offences and major changes have been proposed in the UK's landmark Online Safety Bill, which seeks to regulate social media and tech giants.
BBC
Context & Ripple Effects
The MPs’ package was an early effort to turn platform-safety duties into identifiable executive accountability and enforceable obligations. Related coverage shows the bill later broadened its prohibited-content list through a new set of specified illegal-content duties and ultimately became law with turnover-based penalties.[[a:845575|]]
The arc matters because the proposal joined content rules with internal governance: later coverage also attached criminal liability for senior managers to failures to protect minors, reinforcing the shift from voluntary moderation policies to accountable compliance systems.
First-order effects
Large social-media and technology services face pressure to formalize safety oversight around a designated controller and prepare for a broader set of offenses and financial penalties.
News publishers and major platforms would gain a defined appeal point before news content is removed under the proposed publisher-protection amendment.
Second-order effects
Platform compliance teams must translate legal content categories into moderation, escalation, and appeal processes, while Ofcom’s prospective enforcement power raises the cost of inconsistent implementation.
The proposal intensifies the conflict between safety obligations and speech protections, particularly for activists who argue that anonymity and LGBTQ content could be restricted.
Third-order effects
The bill’s evolution toward large fines tied to CSAM-removal duties and manager liability points to platform governance in which corporate officers, not only companies, are accountable for safety controls.
If this enforcement model persists, UK platform regulation will increasingly treat content distribution as a regulated operational function, with appeals and compliance ownership becoming core product constraints.
The trend: The Online Safety Bill is part of a broader move to make large platforms legally accountable for how they distribute, remove, and govern harmful content.
Our groundbreaking Bill will require tech firms and social media companies to take responsibility to protect their users - especially children - from a full range of illegal and harmful content. Crucially the new legislation will hold big tech to account if they fail to act.
(7/n) Essentially, #OnlineSafetyBill Report brings small, insufficient improvements regarding free speech and digital rights. Overarching concerns of censorship, political influence, @Ofcom independence, capacity and expertise remain. I will expand on areas noted in my tweets.
Seems like compliance with this would NOT mean: ‘platforms should take down anything they believe to be vaguely plausibly illegal under these definitions’ (which could end up being either WAY too wide or WAY too narrow, or both)
A very strong report - skilfully balanced package of conclusions based on thoughtful, deliberative analysis of the evidence. An important staging post to legislation. Also, impressive process to have produced this in the time available - Parliament at its best. https://twitter.co…
I'm delighted the parliamentary joint committee on the #OnlineSafetyBill has listened to our call and agreed that paid for scam advertising should be included in the bill. Now we just have to hope the government will listen to it. My full statement... (feel free to share) https:/…
Which is good - not platforms being the police by proxy, but platforms taking measures to reduce harms which the law also generally tries to tackle. Likely there will be some gaps in what harms are tackled - e.g. dis/misinformation, which is very much not all ‘knowingly false’ ht…
Great news. @OnlineSafetyCom recommends inclusion of paid-for advertising from the scope of the Online Safety Bill. Time for Government to finally listen & take this vital step towards tackling the UK's plague of scams & frauds. @MartinSLewis @WhichUK @PIMFA_UK @mmhpi https://twi…
The Online Harms Bill goes further than any other democratic country in trying to end online chaos. But before we praise it, remember it's taken 300yrs to write and stands on the shoulders of other countries that have had similar in place for years: https://www.bbc.com/...
Disinfo was a big gap in the draft Bill: really glad to see it making a comeback here. Most notably, ads coming into scope - ad fraud has been a big omission so far to the safety regime. Ofcom should be: https://twitter.com/...
This seems an elegant way to thread the needle between ‘requiring platforms to decide what content is illegal and legal’ (which would be Very Bad) and ‘requiring platforms to take down loads of legal content’
["We recommend that Clause 11 of the draft Bill is removed"] Clause 11 is the famous ‘legal but harmful’ duties that have proved somewhat controversial. This looks to introduce duties to mitigate foreseeable risks of harm, linked to other laws that are taken as reasons to interfe…
I'd like to thank the @OnlineSafetyCom for its work. The government will consider its recommendations carefully and incorporate them where we feel the Bill can be strengthened further to make Britain the safest place to go online, while protecting free speech. https://twitter.com…
Report is out. First impression is that it is rather pleased with itself. Humility in public service isn't a thing these days. First takes follow, from the freedom of speech / proportionality / govt overreach perspectives I've focused on for 2 1/2 years now... https://twitter.com…
@OnlineSafetyCom #OnlineSafetyBill Report published today! I have given oral evidence and am pleased to be cited repeatedly in the Report. I am not pleased with most of its content, however. Some of it is an improvement, other recommendations are still concerning. Briefly..(1/n)
but rather *risk mitigation* - moderation, transparency, fact-checking, user controls: all the good things and tools that platforms should be using - with which harms are mitigated being defined by things which are recognised as harmful in criminal law
Content moderation nerds, this is worth checking out. It's not binding on UK govt, but it's an interesting step forward (given also what's going on with EU's Digital Services Act this week). 👇 https://twitter.com/...