You can’t post comments on this blog any more. I’m sad about that, because there have been some useful exchanges in the past.
But, such is the nature of UK internet regulation that I simply didn’t want to risk the potential legal exposure of allowing “user generated content” on yet another site that I own.
And now, in January 2026, I feel like I’ve been taken for a fool by a government – and all too compliant media – that is in the pocket of big tech.
With the Online Safety Act, people like me, who have run online resources for decades, have been required to jump through all sorts of hoops to make sure we comply with the law.
One of my projects is a site with a forum, Toppy.org.uk, for discussion about digital TV recorders. And for that, alongside other sites, I have have had to work through a check list, performing all the risk assessments that Ofcom requires, and documenting them.
Is there a risk that people might use my digital TV forum for human trafficking? Could people on the gay site I run be plotting terrorist acts in the private messages?
All this has to be assessed, and documented, along with procedures to deal with problems, and mitigations. It’s a hell of a lot of effort.
And that’s before we get to age verification, which puts yet more burdens on small sites, and in some cases costs too.
The way the legislation is drawn, people risk almost everything if they are the ones responsible for content on a site; the fines can potentially be huge. There is nothing in the guidelines to say that small sites may face lesser penalties. There is nothing to give someone reassurance that they won’t lose their home, or face bankruptcy, if they don’t do things properly.
So, many sites and forums have adapted. Some have turned off comments. Some have simply shut up shop, and decided “let’s dump this in a facebook group. They can deal with all the legal hassles.”
One of the effects of the UK’s legislation will be to drive people back to the big tech companies, who can handle compliance and age verification. It will recreate the sort of walled-garden “internet” of AOL or CompuServe, to the detriment of many small community sites and minority groups.
No wonder the tech companies don’t protest too much – they stand to gain tremendously.
And, as I write this, X has announced that it’s Sexual Harassment as a Service (SHaaS) system, Grok, will be restricted to paying users, after a furore over the creation of sexualised and abusive images of people, including children.
The political class have wrung their hands, and said they simply have to be on X, though they did indulge in a bit of mild sabre rattling.
That was sufficient for X to restrict SHaaS to paying members, and now everyone’s pretending that’s fixed the problem. Because apparently many journalists and politicians aren’t bright enough to do a quick search and realise that this still leaves two million people – TWO MILLION – with access to the sex-crime bot.
Politicians are shrugging. The media is doing sod all. Elon Musk’s platform, and its squalid users are spewing abusive material all over the internet, and sod all is happening.
Yet small sites like this, and countless others, are forced to act like performing seals, wasting our time on Ofcom questionnaires that will probably never be reviewed by anyone, but which we daren’t omit, lest we be left destitute.
This is a shocking state of affairs, and no politician who supports this grossly unequal treatment deserves to keep their seat.
