UK PM Gives Tech Firms Ultimatum To Block Explicit Images on Children's Phones (theguardian.com)
- Reference: 0183666536
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/06/08/203200/uk-pm-gives-tech-firms-ultimatum-to-block-explicit-images-on-childrens-phones
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jun/08/starmer-tech-firms-ultimatum-block-explicit-images-children-phones
> "Today, I am calling on tech companies operating in this country to introduce vice controls that prevent children from sending and receiving sexually explicit images. Because this is not an impossible challenge," he said. "If they choose not, then we will act and we will change the law." [...] Under the changes, sexual predators will be prevented from being able to exploit and abuse victims through their devices, and children stopped from being able to access pornography, the Home Office said. Adults will still be able to take, share or view nude content once they have verified their age.
>
> In the Commons, Melanie Ward, the Labour MP for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy, said: "It's time to stop asking social media companies to make their products safe, and instead time to start requiring them to do so through regulation." Clive Efford, the Labour MP for Eltham and Chislehurst, said the "sociopaths" running social media platforms had no concern for the welfare of children. "The only message that they're going to listen to is if there's legislation put before this house that is going to act and send a clear message to them." The proposal is designed to sit alongside the Online Safety Act, which requires companies to have processes for removing material that is illegal or harmful to children.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jun/08/starmer-tech-firms-ultimatum-block-explicit-images-children-phones
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, did you not even get to the part where Labor MPs blame social media companies, but for some reason are targeting phone manufcturers?
STOP THE TIDES! (Score:2)
Some Prime Minister decided his name is King Cnut and has ordered the tides of pornography to halt.
This order will work no better then Cnut's did.
How stupid (Score:3)
Just mandate that phones used by minors do not include a camera. You know, dumb phones without cameras. Also, teach your fucking kids that sending nude photos is not acceptable.
Re: (Score:2)
Teaching your kids that it is not acceptable will not stop them from doing it.
Young kids only understand consequences. Many of them get good at acting guilty and crying their way out of punishment whenever they get caught. They learn that the magic words "I understand why it was wrong" reduces potential punishments by tenfold. And then they turn around and do it again the moment they think they won't get caught (and have some reason to do whatever it is).
It's still good to teach ones' kids about unaccept
The stupidity is breathtaking (Score:2)
It's parents who should have that responsibility.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions (Score:2)
How could this law be implemented without every phone being equiped with extremely intrusive surveillance technology that can be turned against journalists, activists, protesters, any pretty much any citizen by any future government ?
Re: (Score:2)
There are no good intentions.
That intrusive surveillance technology is the goal, not an unintended side effect.
Explicit Images (Score:2)
I, for one, am glad someone is finally cracking down on explicit images. If you have words to say, post them as actual text! Don't just throw text onto an image and call it a "meme," because that's totally lame.
How? (Score:1)
How are they supposed to do this? Simply wave their magic wands (now that sounds like a euphemism) and the problem is solved?
So what happens if the companies involved say "can't be done, time to stop selling in the UK"?
Re: (Score:3)
Ah yes, the "I'm going to take my toys and go home" threat, uttered by children and oligarchs everywhere.
Companies unwilling to abide by a country's laws are welcomed to not operate in that country. These threats happen all the time and so far what it takes to get a company to not operate in a given country is pretty much a legal order (see: Russian and Iranian sanction laws).
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the hundreds of billions the US is losing in trade with just the EU.
And they are starting to kick MS/Google/etc out t as well as US credit cards, payment systems, etc etc etc. Worse, they will be able to export those solution to the rest of the world. .
Are many of these things going to be initially as good as the established ones, no, not at all, but they will catch up. And now they have the reasons and the will to do it.
They are saying "NO" to US military and their illegal war in the Middle E
Re: (Score:2)
What if the law is impossible to follow? What if it is technically possible, but implementation is simply not feasible?
And did you notice that the people responsible for the legislation don't seem to agree on who is at fault? They quote MPs who're blaming social media companies, and the PM is putting the burden on phone makers. How does demanding phone makers do something punishing social media companies? "Facebook is evil, let's make Apple change their phones." Huh?
Re: How? (Score:2)
The p.m. is giving companies a chance to get ahead of the legislation. If you are phone manufacturer you put together a plan and a timeline and says we can't do it in 3 months but here's our plan to do it in six. And then 4 months in you go back to the government and say well we've had these setbacks and we've had these things happen that we couldn't account for and it will be eight more months before we're compliant. Eventually government's to pursue these regulations will wane.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone will also file a lawsuit saying their child was excessively injured because when the kid tried to take a picture of a medical issue they were having, the phone blocked it. That brings up another question. Why isn't gore being blocked? Will that be the next target after sex stuff?
> prevent children from sending and receiving sexually explicit images. Because this is not an impossible challenge
It is an impossible challenge because what's sexually explicit is entirely context dependent. Some people get turned on by feet or legs. Do you need to register that fetish so your device will block them? No more looki
Re: (Score:2)
> Of course this all ignores that software to block that kind of stuff already exists. Any parent who wants to block that stuff on their kids devices can already do that.
Honestly I don't think that's actually the case. Do you have examples of software you can install on a phone that blocks people from receiving explicit images? I know examples of software that can prevent people using said software from looking at images, but none that universally filter all incoming content from a variety of sources, e.g. a received WhatsApp image.
To be clear I don't think you can really do this at an OS level either.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, the tech exists. It will be implemented. It won't block the bad stuff, but it will block vital emergency communications. Thousands of people will die.
Re: (Score:2)
Need more data centers so AI can process the images to detect it.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to add, even if it CAN be done the way to do it would have to be cloud based anyway. I mean, right now, some poor guy at YouTube goes though videos looking just for this stuff. All day, every day, looking and watching horrific videos of cp and violent content. Its one of the few AI uses that can save, at least a few people of PTSD.
So now, will the media companies AND device companies do this on each text message and photo sent? Who would be responsible in case of Android phones? The maker or Go
Re: (Score:2)
> How are they supposed to do this?
Apple [1]already has this functionality. [apple.com] Mostly, the issue is that presently you can't get the sort of image recognition technology necessary into the "burner phone" price point. Oh. This all makes sense now.
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/105069