US hauls in UK government officials over under-16s social media ban and censorious media plans

Max Thompson, Campaigns Officer

16 September 2026

Another week, and another dent in the UK-US special relationship has emerged due to the UK Government's blinkered ambition to pursue online censorship.

It has been reported that UK Government officials have been hauled into the US Embassy in London where they were given a dressing down by the Deputy Chief of Mission over the UK Government's plans to implement a social media ban for under-16 year-olds, the Orwellian Online Safety Act, and the alarming proposals included within the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport's media Green Paper, Watch This Space.

It should come as no surprise that the US has grown increasingly alarmed and frustrated by the Labour Government's desire to clamp down on free speech both online and offline, with senior figures within the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers, not pulling any punches.

The meeting, which took place on Monday, saw representatives from DCMS and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) travel to the US Embassy in Nine Elms, London, to be reprimanded by the UK's closest ally.

The first of the concerns raised was that of the planned social media ban for under-16s, which was announced in June of this year, in one of the last acts of the Starmer Government. The ban is based on the Australian model, which critics say has been undermined by widespread circumvention through the use of VPNs. This led the last Technology Secretary, Liz Kendall, to admit at one stage that the Government was even countenancing a possible ban on VPNs, which would have brought the UK into the same league as North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Turkmenistan. In the end, the now AI Minister, Kaniskha Narayan declared the government would not pursue a VPN ban. He did, however, leave the door open to one in the future. The US has argued, much like Reform UK, that more parental controls would be a more effective way to ensure that children are protected from genuine harms online.

But Labour appears to have doubled down on their online safety crusade. Backbench Labour MP Emily Darlington told PoliticsHome:

The first duty of the government is to protect its citizens. Digital security is national security. It would be great to work with our allies on this, but if the UK has to, it will proceed alone.

US officials also used the meeting to voice other concerns with UK departmental officials, namely on the Online Safety Act and the DCMS media Green Paper, Watch This Space. On the matter of the Online Safety Act, one of America's biggest gripes with the UK, officials are believed to have raised their anger at the Act's levy on revenues from big tech companies as a proportion of their global annual turnover, as opposed to reflecting the company's size in the UK alone. Under the Online Safety Act, Ofcom can impose fines on social media companies that breach the Act's rules of £18 million or 10 per cent of global annual turnover — whichever is higher.

The Online Safety Act was promised as domestic legislation with the sole aim of protecting children from online harms. In reality, Ofcom has demonstrated extraterritorial ambitions by fining US companies Kiwi Farms and 4chan, in what the US has categorised as infringing on the First Amendment free speech rights of US citizens and unfairly targeting US businesses.

The other concern raised was over the censorious media Green Paper announced earlier this summer by Lisa Nandy, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. Under the proposals in this media paper, social media companies would be forced to prioritise the promotion of government-approved "trustworthy" news sources, such as public broadcasters like the BBC, ITV, and Channel 4. In turn, that would see other, more critical outlets like The Telegraph, The Guardian, and GB News subsequently demoted.

It beggars belief that the UK Government believes it has the right to decide what constitutes "trustworthy" and to dictate to primarily US-founded companies what British citizens can, and cannot, see.

The US Government shares many of the same concerns as the Free Speech Union about the negative consequences such a step would have for independent journalism and the ability of UK citizens to access critical news sources. The US Embassy, along with the Republican chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, who has written to Ms Nandy outlining his concerns, believes that this policy will unfairly target and harm US businesses. Both the US Embassy and the Free Speech Union responded to DCMS's consultation voicing their opposition.

The Government, with its penchant for online censorship, seems hellbent on pushing our relationship with our closest ally to breaking point.

Read more in PoliticsHome.