Online safety campaigners have warned the UK Government against watering down the Online Safety Act in an effort to secure a favourable trade deal with the US, saying that any move to appease American tech giants would be a ‘sell out of children’s safety’.

Chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, Andy Burrows, said the charity had written to the UK’s business secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, to lay out the ‘dire consequences’ of reducing online safety responsibilities of big tech platforms.

“We are dismayed and appalled by reports that the Online Safety Act could be watered down to facilitate a US trade deal,” Burrows said.

“We have written to Jonathan Reynolds urging him not to continue with an appalling sell out of children’s safety and to meet with lived experience campaigners to understand the dire consequences.

“At a time when online safety laws require strengthening it leaves us questioning how many young lives are we prepared to lose to dodge Trump’s tariffs?”

Questioning the level of support any softening of social media regulation would have among the UK public, the Foundation strongly opposed the idea of using a commitment to review online safety laws for US-based firms as part of any draft trade agreement.

When asked about the possibility of making any tech industry concessions in negotiations with the US, the prime minister told reporters at a local election event that the Government would act in the ‘national interest’, although reiterated the importance of bolstering online safety.

Although the Government may be keen to toe the line between US trade deal and citizens’ online safety to boost the chance of economic growth, fresh research shows that the UK public might not share that sentiment.

The ‘Rollback’ of Safety Measures

A major survey from the Molly Rose Foundation and YouGov polling more than 2,000 British adults this month found that 93% think social media platforms should be prevented from changing their policies to scale back existing safety measures.

Moreover, 86% of adults support a new duty on social media platforms to proactively search for harmful content, while even more (88%) support social media companies being required to prevent children from being exposed to harmful content, even if it’s allowed for adults.

The survey, taken in response to Meta’s decision to stop automatically searching for and removing harmful content in key policy areas and rollback some of its hate and unacceptable speech policies, found strong public support for additional protections against tech companies slashing such safety measures.

Recommended reading

• Nearly a Third of Young People Preyed on by “Text Pests,” ICO Reveals
• Sextortion on the Rise, Empowered by AI
• Instagram Issues New Security Tools to Fight Sextortion

The Molly Rose Foundation wrote to Ofcom in January, warning of the risks of Meta’s rollback, although criticised both the regulator and the Government’s response to the plans, lamenting the UK authorities’ failure to commit to an amendment of the Online Safety Act with stronger measures to stop Meta’s changes going ahead.

“Mark Zuckerberg’s reckless changes pose a fundamental risk to children and young people. This is a big first test of regulation and a timid response could cost lives,” said Burrows.

“The Online Safety Act is the best vehicle we have to protect young people and society from harm, but Meta knows only too well that unless the legislation is strengthened there is nothing to stop them lighting the touchpaper on a disturbing bonfire of safety measures.

“Decisions on how we protect our children must be taken by our Prime Minister and democratically elected government, not determined by tech oligarchs and the demands of the White House.”