Recent changes to online safety laws have failed to meet the expectations of campaigners, according to Baroness Kidron, a leading figure in the fight for digital child protection. Despite ongoing efforts, the filmmaker and founder of the 5Rights Foundation argues that outrage, rather than well-crafted laws, is the main force pushing policymakers to take action.
Kidron, who has long campaigned for children’s online safety, highlighted the shortcomings of current laws, noting that they have not adequately addressed the root causes of harm posed by social media platforms. In an interview with the Press Association, she stated, “What we’re doing is winning the outrage.” The government, she continued, is likely to act out of political expediency by implementing a ban, rather than addressing the deeper issues at play.
Urgency for Action on Data Preservation
Kidron, who also voted for a social media ban for under-16s as part of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, expressed concern about the speed of legislative change. She pointed out that while the government is consulting on measures to protect children online, these discussions are moving too slowly. The government is exploring potential measures, such as setting a minimum age for social media access and limiting addictive features. Kidron emphasized the need for solutions that tackle “root harms” while still providing children with access to the digital world.
Alongside Kidron, Ellen Roome, a mother whose 14-year-old son Jools Sweeney died after participating in an online challenge, has become a vocal advocate for more immediate action. She criticized the lengthy battles families face when seeking justice for their children’s deaths, with vital digital evidence often lost in the immediate aftermath. Roome called for automatic data preservation notices to be implemented, ensuring that social media platforms retain crucial information for investigations into child deaths.
Roome’s frustrations echo the growing consensus among families and experts that current protections are insufficient. “Laws only protect children if they are actually used,” Roome remarked. She pointed to the continued loss of digital evidence and the lack of competency in digital investigations as critical gaps in the system. Until these issues are addressed, she warned, social media companies will remain beyond accountability.
While the government has made some progress through the Online Safety Act, which compels social media companies to share data with coroners, Roome and Kidron argue that these steps are inadequate. Kidron called for clearer accountability for tech firms, comparing their current exemption from liability to the way faulty products like toys or airbags would be recalled. She believes that the time for piecemeal solutions is over and that comprehensive changes are needed to prevent further harm to children.
The conversation surrounding digital safety has intensified, with some parents, including Roome, now calling for a statutory ban on mobile phones in schools. This move is part of broader efforts to regulate the influence of digital platforms on children’s lives, including discussions within the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. The group of bereaved parents, led by Esther Ghey, has petitioned the Prime Minister to act decisively, warning that further delay will only result in more harm to young people.
The government responded to these calls with a spokesperson reaffirming its commitment to ensuring children’s well-being online. They acknowledged the complexity of the issue but assured that a consultation would take place to gather input from experts, parents, and young people. The spokesperson emphasized that while the government has taken steps to ensure that companies share data in cases of child deaths linked to social media, they would continue to monitor and strengthen the regulatory framework as needed.
