Worrying trend sees Brits trying to avoid new adult website block built to protect kids with ID checks from today
A long-awaited new law came into effect at midnight, forcing people to prove they're over 18 by sharing an ID document or scanning their face with a camera.
The sweeping changes affect websites showing porn, or anything linked to self-harm, suicide, or eating disorders - as well as social media apps showing such content.
Websites that fail to implement tougher age checks face being blocked from view in the UK or being hit with hefty fines.
The Online Safety Act is designed to protect children from harmful material and will be enforced by the regulator Ofcom.
But many claim it's "easily exploitable".
It's a "non issue for anyone with the most minimal of computing knowledge" one person wrote on Reddit.
Others fear that the move could inadvertently push people to far dodgier websites.
Ofcom admits there's no way to stop people using VPNs to get around the block.
'Our research shows that these are not people that are out to find porn – it's being served up to them in their feeds,' Oliver Griffiths, group director for online safety at Ofcom told The Sun.
'And we think that these measures are going to have a really big impact in terms of dealing with that particular problem.
"There will be teenagers – dedicated teenagers – who want to find their way to porn, in the same way as people find ways to buy alcohol under 18. They will use VPNs.
'And actually, I think there's a really important reflection here. It's not just us, in terms of making life safer online.
'Parents having a view in terms of whether their kids have got a VPN, and using parental controls and having conversations, feels a really important part of the solution.'
Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said a generation of children will not be allowed to grow up 'at the mercy of toxic algorithms' and warned tech firms 'will be held to account' if they fail to act in line with the changes.
He told Sky News: 'I have very high expectations of the change that children will experience.
'And let me just say this to parents and children, you will experience a different internet really, for the first time in from today, moving forward than you've had in the past. And that is a big step forward.'
Children's charities the NSPCC and Barnardo's are among those who have welcomed the new checks, as well as the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) which hunts and takes down online child abuse material.
Meanwhile, a petition with more than 65,000 signatures at the time of publishing is calling for the law to be reversed, arguing the shake-up is "far broader and restrictive than is necessary in a free society".
THE SHOCKING STATS
Latest figures show the scale of adult content consumption online...
Ofcom stats:
Around 8% children aged 8-14 in the UK visited an online porn site or app in a month.
15% of 13–14-year-olds accessed online porn in a month.
Boys aged 13-14 are the most likely to visit a porn service, significantly more than girls the same age (19% vs 11%).
Our research tells us that around three in ten (29%) or 13.8m UK adults use porn online.
Pornhub is the most used site in the UK – Ofcom research says 18% (8.4m) visited it in one month.
Children's Commissioner stats:
Of the 64% who said that they had ever seen online pornography:
The average age at which children first see pornography is 13. By age nine, 10% had seen pornography, 27% had seen it by age 11 and half of children who had seen pornography had seen it by age 13.
We also find that young people are frequently exposed to violent pornography, depicting coercive, degrading or pain-inducing sex acts; 79% had encountered violent pornography before the age of 18.
Pornography is not confined to dedicated adult sites. We found that Twitter was the online platform where young people were most likely to have seen pornography.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
16 minutes ago
- Spectator
Minister: Farage is on Jimmy Savile's side
An extraordinary exchange on Sky News this morning. Peter Kyle was invited on to discuss the reaction to the implementation of the Online Safety Act, amid concern that it is stifling free speech on the internet. But the Science Secretary opted to hit out at Nigel Farage after his comments at press conference yesterday, by suggesting that the Reform leader was enabling grotesque sexual predators. Kyle told Sky: I see that Nigel Farage is already saying that he would overturn these laws. So we have people out there who are extreme pornographers, pedalling hate, pedalling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side. Make no mistake about it: if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he'd be perpetrating his crimes online, and Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side. An incredulous Wilf Frost asked if the minister was honestly claiming that 'Nigel Farage is on Jimmy Savile's side?' Kyle then opted to ignore the out, choosing instead to double down: Nigel Farage is on the side of turning the clock back to the time when the strange adults, strangers, can get in touch via messaging apps with children. Downing Street must be relieved that there is no lobby briefing today…
Daily Mirror
17 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Nigel Farage savaged by Cabinet minister with brutal Jimmy Savile insult
The Technology Secretary has said Nigel Farage is on the side of people like Jimmy Savile after the Reform UK leader said he'd scrap protections for kids online. Peter Kyle said repealing online safety laws would open the floodgates of "people out there who are extreme pornographers peddling hate, peddling violence" onto children's social media feeds. And he said if disgraced Savile - one of the UK's most prolific sexual predators - was alive today, Mr Farage would be "perpetuating" criminals like him. Mr Farage yesterday said his party would abolish the Online Safety Act if it got into power. It would mean removing Ofcom's children's safety codes, which came into force on Friday and which order tech companies to bring in age verification tools, tame toxic algorithms and remove harmful content. The Reform UK leader hit back at Mr Kyle's comments, branding them "disgusting" and asking him to apologise. Major backlash over Nigel Farage tech vow - 'doesn't care if kids are exploited' Speaking on Sky News this morning, Mr Kyle said: "I see that Nigel Farage is already saying that he's going to overturn these laws. We have people out there who are extreme pornographers peddling hate, peddling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side. "Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he would be perpetrating his crimes online, and Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side, not the side of children." Asked if he genuinely thought Mr Farage was on Savile's side, Mr Kyle continued: "When it comes to online activity, we have seen unfettered access of adults to children via social media. When we put in the age verification, it stops strange adults getting in touch with children. "Nigel Farage is on the side of turning the clock back to the time when strange adults, strangers can get in touch via messaging apps with children. We have now asked them to verify the age in which people can have access to online content, so we can protect children from unwanted, dangerous content, and also those messaging services where people can get access directly to it." Mr Farage responded: "Peter Kyle's comments on Sky News are disgusting. He should do the right thing and apologise." Elsewhere, Mr Kyle acknowledged there was an issue with people using virtual private networks (VPNs) to circumvent the rules, after one supplier reported a 1,400% increase in downloads. He said he is not considering banning VPNs, adding: "We're going to be looking very, very closely at use of VPNs. "We're going to be looking very closely at the ability of these tech companies to detect VPNs from within our country and make sure that people stick to the rules." And the Cabinet minister admitted the rules were never going to keep 100% of children safe but that the new laws were a "big step forward" in keeping most people safe. "People have to understand the wild west that children have been living in for too long," he said. "That ended on my watch. It ended on the watch of this government. It's a big step forward." We'll be bringing you the latest updates on this Breaking Politics News story. Please check back regularly for updates on this developing story HERE. Get email updates on the day's biggest stories straight to your inbox by signing up for our newsletters. Get all the big headlines, pictures, analysis, opinion and video on the stories that matter to you by following The Mirror every time you see our name.
Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves can raise taxes as much as she likes, but it won't bring in any more money
The IMF has warned Chancellor Rachel Reeves that she must make tough choices to cut the UK's deficit, potentially including some combination of raising taxes on working people, abandoning the pensions triple lock or charging for the NHS. The first of these options – raising taxes – is considered politically the most likely. After all, Labour MPs didn't even agree to cuts to winter fuel payments. It's impossible to imagine them agreeing to cut the NHS, and abandoning the triple lock seems like political suicide. Yet it's highly doubtful whether raising tax rates further will produce any more tax revenue out of the UK economy. Even as matters stand, taxes are scheduled to go higher than they've ever been since World War II, and to be around 37½ percent of GDP for the rest of this Parliament. But that considerably understates the situation. Prior to 2021/22 they'd only ever once been above 35 percent of GDP since the 1950s, in 1969/70, and then for only one year before falling back sharply. Thereafter, until the 2020s, it was rare for them to be above 33½ per cent of GDP. We aren't merely at a record. We are at an out-of-the-park record scheduled to be sustained for an absolutely unprecedented period of time. The chances of the UK economy delivering even the tax levels already scheduled are slim, let alone imagining taxes could be raised a lot further. Yet despite these astonishing record-high taxes, the economy is still running a large deficit of over 5 per cent of GDP. Remember the 'Maastricht Convergence Criteria' requiring budget deficits to be no higher than 3 per cent of GDP? Well, we're way above that. When the deficit exceeded 6 per cent of GDP in the 1990s we had a significant fiscal consolidation under Norman Lamont and Kenneth Clarke. Yet at that time the UK's national debt was under 40 per cent of GDP. Now it's over 100 per cent. Our situation is way worse than it was in the early 1990s. We need a fiscal consolidation to address that 5 per cent deficit. But the current thinking appears to be that all of that deficit cut will come from tax rises. Indeed, possibly more than all of it, because spending will probably go up further. To balance the books we'd need to rise from that record 37½ per cent of GDP spending to over 42½ per cent. Add in a percentage point for further spending rises and we'd be over 43½ per cent or fully 10 percentage points of tax higher than the UK has ever produced on a sustained basis in well over 80 years. One key reason tax takes top out at some point relative to GDP is that they destroy growth. Over the long-term having a high share of tax in GDP damages long-term growth – each 10 per cent rise in tax reduces the growth rate by around 1.2 per cent – which in the UK's case would mean reducing its sustainable growth rate to zero. In the short-term, raising taxes often triggers recessions, bringing down tax revenues. That loss of tax revenues as growth peters out, or outright recession ensues, means that tax-based fiscal consolidations typically don't work. If you have a high deficit, raising taxes is almost never a way to cut that deficit – even if it were a Good Thing to have higher tax in itself, it simply doesn't work in that situation. The normal advice the IMF and similar bodies used to provide in fiscal consolidations was that they should be predominantly spending cuts-based. The IMF often used a rule of thumb of about two thirds spending cuts to one third tax rises. The EU used much the same rule of thumb in the Eurozone crisis era austerity programmes. However, the most successful consolidations – the ones where the deficit falls and stays down, with debt dropping away relative to GDP over time – tend to have higher ratios of spending cuts, of around 75 to 80 per cent to 20 to 25 per cent tax rises. We need at least that ratio in the UK now, if not higher. But that is not what Labour backbench MPs will ever agree to.
