Social media curfews could be imposed on children, says Digital Secretary
Social media curfews for children are among a range of plans being considered by the Government, the Digital Secretary has revealed.
Peter Kyle told the Daily Telegraph he was 'watching very carefully' the introduction of TikTok's 10pm curfew for users under 16 and examining tools for parents to switch off access at set times.
'These are things I am looking at,' he said.
'I'm not going to act on something that will have a profound impact on every single child in the country without making sure that the evidence supports it.'
The proposal came amid concerns about how the 'addictive' nature of social media was interrupting sleep schedules and disrupting schooling and family life.
Mr Kyle said he was considering enforcement options under the Online Safety Act following regulator Ofcom's publication of the Children's Code.
He described the new rules as a 'sea change' under which parents can expect their child's social media experience to 'look and feel different'.
Mr Kyle said he would not be 'short of encouraging Ofcom to use its powers to the full' to fine social media companies and imprison offenders.
The Online Safety Act began coming into effect last month and requires platforms to follow new codes of practice set by the regulator Ofcom, in order to keep users safe online.
It comes after the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), which finds and helps remove abuse imagery online, said 291,273 reports of child sexual abuse imagery were reported in 2024.
In its annual report, the organisation said it was seeing rising numbers of cases being driven by threats, including AI-generated sexual abuse content, sextortion and the malicious sharing of nude or sexual imagery.
It said under-18s were now facing a crisis of sexual exploitation and risk online.
In response, the IWF announced it was making a new safety tool available to smaller websites for free, to help them spot and prevent the spread of abuse material on their platforms.
The tool, known as Image Intercept, can spot and block images in the IWF's database of more than 2.8 million which have been digitally marked as criminal imagery.
The IWF said it will give wide swathes of the internet new, 24-hour protection and help smaller firms comply with the Online Safety Act.
Derek Ray-Hill, interim chief executive at the IWF, said: 'Young people are facing rising threats online where they risk sexual exploitation, and where images and videos of that exploitation can spread like wildfire.
'New threats like AI and sexually coerced extortion are only making things more dangerous.
'Many well-intentioned and responsible platforms do not have the resources to protect their sites against people who deliberately upload child sexual abuse material.
'That is why we have taken the initiative to help these operators create safer online spaces by providing a free-of-charge hash checking service that will identify known criminal content.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Minister dismisses US fears about China's London 'super embassy' as White House warns against letting Beijing build near sensitive City sites
A senior minister today dismissed US misgivings about controversial plans for a Chinese 'super embassy' near the City of London today. The Trump administration has urged Downing Street to block the proposed development close to London financial centres amid fears that it will be used to tap into commercial information. It is the latest warning to be presented to ministers about the site at Royal Mint Court, close to the Tower of London, which is near a sensitive hub of essential communication cables. But Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said the UK would offer a 'fulsome response' to any security concerns raised. He told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips on Sky News: 'These issues will be taken care of assiduously in the planning process. 'But just to reassure people, we deal with embassies and these sorts of infrastructure issues all the time. 'We are very experienced of it, and we are very aware of these sorts of issues constantly, not just when new buildings are being done, but all the time.' However, shadow home secretary Chris Philp told the same programme: 'It is a security risk - it is likely to become a base for their (China's) pan-European espionage activities.' The suggested site is also situated between several major financial hubs in Canary Wharf and the City as well as three crucial data centres. It is understood US President Donald Trump has warned Sir Keir Starmer against giving the embassy the go-ahead. The matter is believed to have been discussed during trade talks, as Britain and its Atlantic ally discuss how they will implement a trade deal to avoid UK steel producers being lumbered with 50 percent import tariffs by July 9. According to The Times, US diplomats would be trepidatious about sharing intelligence with Britain if the embassy went ahead. A senior US official told the publication: 'The United States is deeply concerned about providing China with potential access to the sensitive communications of one of our closest allies.' It comes after claims 'dark cabling' running beneath the proposed site 'feeds the City of London' were given in a memo to the United States' National Security Council by members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (Ipac). John Moolenaar, the Republican head of the House of Representatives' China committee said if these reports were 'accurate' the site would 'pose an unacceptable risk' to both the UK and US. 'The Chinese Communist Party has a clear track record of targeting critical infrastructure.' he said. 'This development would raise serious concerns in the United States and could be viewed as an act of strategic overreach by Beijing and a curious error in judgment by London.' The executive director of IPAC, Luke de Pulford dubbed the matter as a 'flashpoint' in US-UK trade talks, adding it was 'staggering' the White House had to corroborate the cabling risk to 'defend its own financial system'. 'It's time to send Xi Jinping a clear message: no matter the pressure or coercion, the UK and US won't trade away national security, and this embassy isn't happening,' he said. China has been attempting to revise plans for the Royal Mint building, which neighbours the Tower of London, since it was purchased in 2018. The matter is believed to have been discussed during trade talks regarding steel production It is believed the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, brought up the matter with foreign secretary, David Lammy, while visiting London last year. According to The Times, President Xi had also discussed the same issue with the Prime Minister in a phone conversation. The proposal for the embassy, which would be China's largest in Europe, was previously rejected by Tower Hamlets council in 2022. But two weeks after Labour Chancellor Rachel Reeves came back from a visit to China earlier this year, both the council's and Scotland Yard's objections were dropped. Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, described China as a 'dangerous threat to the national and economic security of our country'. She said the Conservative party continued to stand 'firmly' against the embassy proposals, stating her party would never put the UK's 'financial centre or country at risk.' Next Monday, three of Trump's aides are scheduled to meet with their Chinese peers in London for discussions in a bid to solve the current trade war between the two economic powerhouses. The Treasury secretary Scott Bessent, the commerce secretary Howard Lutnick and the trade representative Jamieson Greer will act as representatives for the US, Trump has declared on Truth Social. Yesterday, China 's foreign ministry confirmed vice-premier He Lifeng will be on British shores from June 8 until June 13, adding that talks would with the US would take place. Previously, a Chinese embassy spokesperson has quashed spy allegations, stating: 'Anti-China elements are always keen on slandering and attacking China.' A government spokesman said: 'Applications for a new Chinese embassy in Tower Hamlets have been called in for ministers to decide. A final decision will be made in due course.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Cuts to BBC World Service funding would ‘make us less safe', MPs tell ministers
Hours before Rachel Reeves stood up to deliver her budget last year, government officials were still in tense negotiations with bosses at the BBC over how much the World Service would be given. The amount they were haggling over was relatively small – just £5.5m out of a total budget of £400m. But BBC chiefs warned the government that if the cuts were imposed on them, they would have to close several language stations in parts of the world where the Russians already hold influence. Doing so would be a gift to Moscow, they added. The argument worked, and the BBC got the extra cash it was asking for. But executives at the corporation worry that their appeal to Britain's soft power might not prove so effective this time, especially in light of the government's recent cuts to the aid budget. 'The government is asking the World Service to model cuts that would definitely mean having to close important parts of the service,' said one person familiar with the negotiations. 'The BBC's lobbying worked last time, but this round is proving harder.' The Guardian recently revealed the government had asked the World Service to model two scenarios: one where their funding remains the same in cash terms; and one where it would be cut by 2% each year in cash terms. Each scenario would see the budget fall behind inflation, and could mean it ends up to £70m short of what its bosses believe it needs. Jonathan Munro, the global director of the BBC, said: 'When it comes to international impact and influence, the BBC World Service is the UK's most powerful asset. 'While we currently deliver news in 42 languages to over 400m people every week, at the greatest value for money compared to other international news providers, we are ambitious about going further to provide independent news where there is a vital need.' The service is just one institution promoting Britain's soft power abroad, but it is arguably the most powerful, reaching 450m people a week, according to the broadcaster's own figures. When pollsters asked people from around the world about various British exports and organisations, the BBC came out well ahead of any other, with nearly 80% having heard of it and nearly 50% saying it made them feel more positively about the UK. In comparison, only about 55% had heard of the monarchy, and only 25% said it made them view the UK more favourably. According to the same research, which the BBC commissioned, the organisation is also the most trusted of any global news outlet, ahead of CNN, Al Jazeera and Sky News. Jonathan McClory, the managing partner at Sanctuary Counsel and an expert on soft power, said: 'It's a gratuitous accident of history that we have the BBC World Service. You couldn't recreate it if you were starting from scratch, but it enables us to shape a global information landscape and promote British values, such as a free press, transparency and broad support for human rights.' Ministers say they understand this. Jenny Chapman, the international development minister, told the Guardian: 'The World Service do tremendous work, work that nobody else can do … They are soft power, an absolute gold standard resource. We respect that.' But supporters of the organisation fear that budgetary pressure has left its influence on the wane. In 2014, the coalition government stopped funding the world service, leaving the BBC to pay for it purely out of the licence fee. Two years later the government restored some direct funding, which was ringfenced for certain language services, but at a much lower level. Most of the service's £400m budget still comes from licence fee money – a situation the director general, Tim Davie, has warned is not sustainable, especially when domestic operations are being cut. Both scenarios that the government has asked BBC bosses to draw up for the World Service would involve closing certain parts of it. While it will not shut down operations in entire countries, BBC insiders say they are likely to have to close certain foreign language services where there are relatively few people who speak that language. Those services in places close to Russia – which corporation bosses warned last year would be closed if more money was not forthcoming – are once more on the chopping block. The problem with closing operations, even those with relatively small audiences, is that it can give Russia and China a perfect opportunity to push their own propaganda. When the BBC ended its long-wave BBC Arabic radio service in Lebanon, for example, Russian-backed media took over that exact frequency and began broadcasting on it instead. And on the day that thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah all simultaneously exploded in Lebanon, BBC monitors said they picked up what Davie later called 'unchallenged [Russian] propaganda' on that station. The BBC's research has found that its trust level was largely unchanged from four years ago at 78%. Trust in both Russia Today and China Global Television Network had jumped however, from 59% to 71% and from 62% to 70%, respectively. Last week Caroline Dinenage, the Conservative chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, wrote to cabinet ministers warning: 'Without sufficient resources, it could lead to more situations where the world service withdraws or reduces its services and Russian state media fills the vacuum, as in Lebanon. 'Ahead of the spending review, I invite you to reassure us that the government is not seeking to make a 2% cut to its funding of the World Service, at a time when it is vital to our strategic priorities, and that the government will not require cuts that will lead to the BBC having to close one or more language services.' Such arguments have worked with Reeves and her officials in the past. But the chancellor is hemmed in like never before, having already promised major funding increases for defence, the health service and local transport. Dinenage said: 'Ministers have told us that the world service bolsters UK security. Cutting its funding now would undoubtably make us all less safe.' A Foreign Office spokesperson said: 'Despite a tough fiscal situation, we continue to back the World Service, providing a large uplift of £32.6m this year alone, taking our total funding to £137m. 'The work they do as an independent and trusted broadcaster is highly valued by this government, as our continued financial support shows.'
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Justice Jackson warns Supreme Court is sending a 'troubling message'
"It is particularly startling to think that grants of relief in these circumstances might be (unintentionally) conveying not only preferential treatment for the Government but also a willingness to undercut both our lower court colleagues' well-reasoned interim judgments and the well-established constraints of law that they are in the process of enforcing," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote. Jackson was dissenting from the conservative majority's decision to give Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency complete access to the data of millions of Americans kept by the U.S. Social Security Administration. Once again, she wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, "this Court dons its emergency responder gear, rushes to the scene, and uses its equitable power to fan the flames rather than extinguish them." A district judge had blocked DOGE's access to "personally identifiable information" while assessing if that access is legal. Jackson said a majority of the court didn't require the administration to show it would be "irreparably harmed" by not getting immediate access, one of the legal standards for intervention. "It says, in essence, that although other stay applicants must point to more than the annoyance of compliance with lower court orders they don't like," she wrote, "the Government can approach the courtroom bar with nothing more than that and obtain relief from this Court nevertheless." A clock, a mural, a petition: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's chambers tell her story In a brief and unsigned decision, the majority said it weighed the "irreparable harm" factor along with the other required considerations of what's in the public interest and whether the courts are likely to ultimately decide that DOGE can get at the data. But the majority did not explain how they did so. Jackson said the court `plainly botched' its evaluation of a Trump appeal Jackson raised a similar complaint when the court on May 30 said the administration can revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans living in the United States. Jackson wrote that the court "plainly botched" its assessment of whether the government or the approximately 530,000 migrants would suffer the greater harm if their legal status ends while the administration's mass termination of that status is being litigated. Jackson said the majority undervalued "the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending." The majority did not offer an explanation for its decision. More Supreme Court wins for Trump In addition to those interventions, the Supreme Court recently blocked a judge's order requiring DOGE to disclose information about its operations, declined to reinstate independent agency board members fired by Trump, allowed Trump to strip legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelans and said the president can enforce his ban on transgender people serving in the military. Jackson disagreed with all of those decisions. The court's two other liberal justices - Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - disagreed with most of them. More: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson can throw a punch. Literally. The court did hand Trump a setback in May when it barred the administration from quickly resuming deportations of Venezuelans under a 1798 wartime law. Two of the court's six conservative justices - Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito - dissented. Decisions are expected in the coming weeks on other Trump emergency requests, including whether the president can dismantle the Education Department and can enforce his changes to birthright citizenship.
