Contact your local MP and spread this far and wide:

Subject: Urgent Action Required – Online Safety Act Harms

Dear [MP’s Name],

I am writing to you as a concerned constituent to demand urgent review and amendment of the Online Safety Act (OSA). While its stated aim is to protect users, it has already created serious harm to privacy, freedom of expression, and access to public knowledge.

The Government’s response to the Change.org petition failed to meaningfully address any of these widely raised concerns, offering vague assurances instead of evidence or concrete changes. This is unacceptable in a democracy.

Key problems now being reported: • Excessive censorship – Vague definitions of “harm” are silencing lawful speech, political debate, and online communities. • Privacy risks from mandatory age verification – Requires intrusive ID checks (including facial recognition), creating huge data breach risks. • Threat to public-interest platforms – Wikipedia and similar sites could face UK restrictions if forced to verify all contributors. • Erosion of encryption – Weakening secure communication systems in a way experts call “authoritarian” and “technically incoherent.” • Ineffectiveness – VPN use has surged by over 500%, making the law easy to bypass while still harming UK-based platforms. • Harm to vulnerable communities – Risks “outing” LGBTQ+ individuals and deterring use of safe online support spaces.

Recent events highlight the urgency: • High Court ruling (Aug 2025) dismissed Wikimedia’s challenge, but confirmed Ofcom must act proportionately. • Major online communities and platforms have blocked UK users or imposed invasive checks. • Civil rights groups and tech experts continue to warn the OSA is fundamentally flawed.

I am asking you to: 1. Support a full Parliamentary review of the OSA’s harms and unintended consequences. 2. Press for immediate amendments to protect privacy, encryption, and public-interest platforms. 3. Suspend or repeal the most damaging provisions until they can be replaced with proportionate, evidence-based measures.

This is not a partisan matter — it is about protecting fundamental rights, digital freedoms, and public trust. I request a written reply outlining your position and the actions you will take.

Yours sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address]

  • mysticmartz@lemmy.worldOP
    7·
    4 hours ago

    I then suggest we build a public list of MP’s that agree with us and those that don’t .

    We don’t have to just contact our local MP’s we could contact other political parties and their leaders with a little rewording of the above.

      • mysticmartz@lemmy.worldOP
        1·
        3 hours ago

        I’ve seen a few YouTube videos suggesting to follow the money. It suggests a lot of political lobbyists value a more restricted internet as they stand to profit . Interesting you mention the Catholic Church because someone else suggested these new laws will push children to more unregulated places further putting them at risk.

        • JumpyWombat@lemmy.ml
          3·
          2 hours ago

          I suggested the Catholics because they just did it, but that idea seems to appreciated by autocrats and fascists worldwide from China to the US. Here in the EU we are hypocrites: we do it “for the children” to make it palatable to the general public that will never dare to oppose to that excuse. “If you are against this, you are with the pedos” is a frequently used argument.

          Obviously porn will not disappear from Internet, and there is no regulation that can achieve that, but the goal is not porn. The goal is to make it harder for a child to access scientific information about his sexuality while growing up, or for an adult to access historical information about what fascism really meant. Things like that are the real targets.

          Because ignorance is a fertile ground to cultivate idiot voters.