Why Some Websites May Leave the UK Over Online Safety Rules

4 September 2025

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

The UK’s Online Safety Act, passed in 2023, is beginning to reshape how people experience the internet in Britain. While much of the legislation has yet to come into force, some of its requirements are already being felt. With stricter rules set to take effect in September, questions are being raised about whether the UK’s digital landscape could be permanently changed.

Blue fiber optic cables emit glowing light with a dark background, creating a futuristic and dynamic atmosphere.

At its core, the Act is designed to make online spaces safer by holding tech platforms accountable for harmful content. This means services of all sizes, from global giants to small community forums, must assess and mitigate risks such as child exploitation, harassment, misinformation, and access to adult material. But how these responsibilities are enforced, and whether every platform is willing or able to comply, is where the complications begin.

Early Changes and Adjustments

Some companies have already begun reshaping how their services work in the UK. Steam, one of the world’s largest video game platforms, recently introduced a stricter credit card verification system in Britain, designed to restrict under-18s from accessing adult-rated games. Other platforms have implemented stronger age checks or limited features that could expose children to inappropriate material.

Steam has introduced stricter Credit Card verification

Not every company is willing to adapt, however. Wikipedia has openly questioned whether it can realistically comply with the Act. Its non-profit structure, reliance on volunteer moderation, and commitment to user privacy make it unlikely to adopt age verification or sweeping content controls. The Wikimedia Foundation has warned that if forced to implement intrusive measures, it may consider withdrawing services from the UK altogether.

Resistance and Concerns

It is not just Wikipedia sounding alarms. Smaller online communities and specialist forums argue that the Act favours large, well-funded platforms that can afford to build complex moderation systems. For independent websites, compliance could mean costly technical overhauls or the risk of heavy fines. There are fears that some may choose to block UK users rather than take on new legal and financial risks.

Laptop screen showing the Wikipedia homepage in a web browser. Background is softly blurred with warm tones, suggesting a cozy indoor setting. — ***Wikipedia has warned it may withdraw services in the UK***

Tech giants, meanwhile, have expressed their own reservations. While companies like Meta, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) have pledged to follow the law, they continue to push back against specific provisions, particularly those requiring proactive removal of harmful but legal content. Critics argue that this places platforms in the role of arbiters of free speech, forcing them to make subjective decisions under threat of penalty.

What Happens in September

The most significant shift is expected in September, when further stipulations of the Act are set to take effect. Age verification requirements for adult content sites are likely to be enforced, echoing earlier debates around proposed online pornography restrictions that collapsed in 2019. This time, however, the rules come with more teeth: websites that fail to comply could face fines of up to 10% of global revenue or even be blocked entirely by UK internet providers.

The introduction of these measures could see a wave of disruption. Adult content platforms, gambling sites, and online services with mature-rated material are likely to be most immediately affected. But ripple effects may extend much further, impacting creative communities, independent publishers, and even gaming services if strict verification rules are applied broadly.

The Future of the UK Internet

Supporters of the Online Safety Act argue that these changes are long overdue. They point to the harm caused by online abuse, the easy availability of explicit material, and the difficulty parents face in monitoring children’s digital lives. For them, forcing platforms to take responsibility is a necessary step toward a safer internet.

Gamer with headphones focused on a video game. Colorful keyboard, intense screen reflections, dim gaming room setting.

Opponents counter that the measures are heavy-handed and risk creating a two-tier internet where UK users are cut off from parts of the global web. They warn that age verification systems could undermine privacy, increase data risks, and erode digital freedoms. If major services were to withdraw or limit access, Britain could find itself with a diminished internet compared to the rest of the world.

As September approaches, the question is less about whether the Act will change the internet in the UK, but by how much. What began as a promise to protect users may well mark the start of a more fragmented and tightly controlled online experience, one where availability and freedom depend on a platform’s ability — or willingness — to comply.

Current Most Read

The Simpsons: From Springfield to the World

A World on Edge: The Rising Tide of Geoeconomic Confrontations in 2025

Paul Francis
May 28
3 min read

As the world grapples with economic volatility, global power shifts, and fractured alliances, a new form of conflict has emerged to shape the 21st-century geopolitical landscape: geoeconomic confrontation. Unlike the open warfare of the past, today’s great powers wield economic instruments as tools of coercion and influence, redrawing the contours of global relations without a single shot fired.

Cargo ship with colorful containers sails through blue ocean, leaving white waves behind. Clear sky and calm water create a serene mood.

This economic warfare is not merely a clash of trade policies but a deeply entrenched strategic contest. From tit-for-tat tariffs and sanctions to restrictions on critical technologies and raw materials, the economic battlefield is expanding across borders and industries with alarming speed.

The Shift in Global Risk Perceptions

According to the World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2025, geoeconomic confrontation now ranks among the top 10 global risks over the next two years, a marked rise from 14th place previously. The scale of concern is reflected in the dramatic increase in harmful trade interventions, which surged from 600 in 2017 to over 3,000 annually from 2022 to 2024.

The report warns of an "unprecedented degree of fragmentation in the global order," driven by eroding trust in institutions, fractured alliances, and the increasing use of economic tools as political weapons.

United States: Tariffs, Nationalism, and Economic Pressure

In 2025, the United States, under President Donald Trump’s second administration, has reasserted its protectionist economic vision. In a sweeping move, the administration imposed 25% tariffs on all imports from Mexico and most from Canada (excluding energy, which faced a 10% tariff). The U.S. framed the policy as a defence of domestic industry, but it swiftly sparked retaliatory tariffs and lawsuits at the World Trade Organization.

More dramatically, a new 34% "reciprocal tariff" on most Chinese imports marked a major escalation in U.S.-China economic tensions. China’s countermeasures included retaliatory tariffs, blacklisting American companies, and restricting the export of rare-earth elements critical to the tech and defence industries.

The fallout has rattled global markets, with business investment in the U.S. recording its sharpest six-month decline since the pandemic recovery period. Investors remain jittery amid rising costs, broken supply chains, and unpredictable policy shifts.

China: Economic Retaliation and Realignment

China has responded to U.S. aggression with a mix of assertiveness and strategy. It cut American oil imports by 90% and bolstered energy ties with Canada. Export controls on rare-earth metals—resources vital to semiconductors, batteries, and defence systems—sent shockwaves through tech industries worldwide.

Excavators and trucks operate in a large, dusty open-pit mine. Yellow machinery contrasts with the brown earth. Text reads "DT-0123."

At the same time, Beijing is seeking to shore up regional alliances. New trade frameworks with South Korea and Japan signal China’s intent to reduce reliance on Western markets and reroute supply chains through Asia. While the moves offer Beijing a measure of resilience, they also raise the spectre of competing economic blocs.

The European Union: Fragmented Unity, Strategic Dilemmas

The European Union finds itself increasingly caught in the middle of global economic rivalries. The bloc’s response to Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to strain internal consensus, with countries like Hungary threatening to veto further sanctions.

Amid this, the EU is seeking to bolster its economic sovereignty. Policy proposals to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar in cross-border payments and develop independent financial mechanisms reflect growing discomfort with Washington’s dominance.

Yet the EU remains vulnerable. Efforts to sanction Russian energy, support Ukraine, and maintain a unified front against U.S. trade pressures are stretching the bloc’s political and economic cohesion.

Global Impacts: Fragmentation and Uncertainty

The global economy is feeling the ripple effects of these confrontations:

Supply Chains Under Strain: Industries dependent on cross-border logistics—from electronics to automotive manufacturing—face higher costs and delays.
Investment Paralysis: Heightened unpredictability deters foreign direct investment, with firms hesitant to commit capital in unstable regulatory environments.
Technological Decoupling: Competing standards, export restrictions, and bans on dual-use technologies threaten to fragment the global innovation ecosystem.

The International Monetary Fund has warned that if decoupling accelerates, long-term global GDP could shrink by up to 7%, with disproportionate impacts on developing economies.

Navigating a Turbulent Future

Governments, businesses, and multilateral institutions must act with foresight and adaptability. Strategies for resilience include:

Diversifying Trade Partners and Supply Chains: To reduce dependency on single-source nations.
Reinvigorating Global Institutions: WTO and IMF reforms could provide more equitable platforms for dispute resolution.
Investing in Strategic Autonomy: National industries critical to energy, health, and digital security must be prioritised.

As economic confrontation replaces conventional diplomacy, the world teeters on a knife-edge between strategic competition and systemic fragmentation. The next chapter of global order may not be written in treaties, but in tariffs.