The UK’s Online Safety Act came into force last October.  Conceived under the old government, it is the new Labour government that will have to implement it. We are already hearing about the shocking inheritance that Labour Ministers are finding in other departments. This article considers how the Act may yield  some unpleasant surprises. 

Online safety is about the unintended consequences of new communications technologies. These technologies have brought us many  benefits we enjoy,  but they is inordinately complex. Online platforms and networks provide digital bridges to link us up with friends, family, colleagues, to help us learn, entertain us and it must be said, support many critical functions in modern society.  

The unintended consequences stem from the way the individuals apply the technology and the way that it is coded. Online safety policy acknowledges that the use of the technology can yield harmful outcomes and this is what the Online Safety Act seeks to address.

The Online safety Act was conceived in the toxic and disfunctional political environment after the 2016 referendum, and shaped during the Covid period under a disingenuous  government. Sadly, it was positioned as a wedge issue, which provided precisely the wrong type of guidance for legislators.

A major concern is that the Online Safety Act suffers from similar failings to other laws proposed by the previous Conservative  government,  but because it is tech, these failings are not seen. It suffers from similar failings to other laws proposed by the previous government. However,  because it is tech, these failings are not seen. It is devoid of detail in the critical sections.  It  hides many skeletons,  suffers from flawed thinking, and  rushed, ill-informed  decision-making.

Its problems begin with the lack of definition. As I wrote here back in 2022, when it was just a draft Bill, it can be interpreted according to what any individual would like to hear. As such, it is driven by lack of vision and lacks clarity throughout. As it was being legislated, it became increasingly complex, although it was beautifully choreographed, notably in the Lords.

The true hidden effects of this law have yet to come to light. Ministers are given unprecedented powers to change the Act, without any further scrutiny from  Parliament. It strips out EU law principles that have been a part of British law for two decades.  Crucially,  it creates an extra-territorial effect that breaks the rules and norms of this global system in a way that is unlikely to make friends,  and will harm this country’s reputation on the international stage.

The Online Safety Act  turns speech into a risk, in the same way as a pothole in a road is a risk.  This in itself should raise alarm bells. In a democratic society, we must be able to speak without risk that when we open our mouth a private provider will decide if the sound can be transmitted. Where there are boundaries of unacceptable speech,  we should know clearly what they are, and be able to take independent action to avoid them. Where restrictions are imposed on speech, the law should be clear about what is disallowed. The Online Safety Act is not.   

The Act fails to address the nature of the technology, the way it works, how the component parts of the systems rub along together. It runs roughshod over core principles that underpin the Internet which runs the arteries and the veins that carry the data which is the lifeblood of the system.

The  Act addresses the bad things about tech, without acknowledging the public good that  it brings. It focusses intensely on the way that bad actors behave online. It seeks to counter this behaviour with complex and likely unfeasible technical measures. It waves a dark hand suggesting the online world is a haven for criminality but lacks specificity as to exactly what this looks like in an online post, leaving decisions to the online platform providers.

As a disruptor, the Act  risks damaging the functioning of the network to a detrimental effect.  As such, it will most  likely not succeed in achieving the policy aims. That would be a shame, as the Act does seek to address some very serious issues.

Not least of these is violence against women, which the government has just escalated up the list of its law enforcement priorities. Online safety does not offer a silver bullet, and it is a poor law enforcer, but may be an important component in a policy solution. However, it will only do that if the measures are designed to  function with the technology, not rub up against it. 

---

You are free to cite from this article. Kindly acknowledge Dr Monica Horten as the author and provide a link back.

I provide independent advice on policy issues related to online content. Please get in touch to discuss any requirement for assistance with  policy analysis.