The online world is at a crossroads. Governments, corporations, and regulators are increasingly weighing how to balance child safety, digital identity verification, and freedom of information. While digital IDs and online safety regulations may offer important protections, they also raise pressing questions about privacy, censorship, and surveillance. For businesses and organisations building their presence online, these debates are not abstract—they shape how we all communicate and grow in the digital space.
Digital IDs: Privacy Risks and Slow Adoption in the UK
Digital identity systems promise secure authentication and easier access to online services. Yet adoption in the UK has been slow. A 2024 report by Think Digital Partners highlighted how confusion, lack of awareness, and fears of “Big Brother”–style monitoring are stalling progress.
Organisations are often reluctant to implement digital IDs due to:
- Unclear terminology and technical complexity.
- Public mistrust, with many equating digital ID with national ID cards (and inevitably a way to “keep tabs.”)
- Privacy concerns, including how personal data will be stored and used.
The Open Identity Exchange (OIX) has been vocal in stressing that digital ID does not mean national ID cards, but public perception continues to be a barrier. For small businesses and charities, this uncertainty can feel especially daunting when planning websites or online services. How do you ensure you maintain trust with your customers and keep them safe at the same time?
Censorship, Corporate Power, and Mastercard’s Retreat
Another, and ongoing part, of the online censorship debate comes from corporate actors. Mastercard, for instance, faced criticism for its involvement in the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), a coalition accused of indirectly censoring certain outlets under the guise of combating misinformation.
In 2024, following shareholder pressure, Mastercard announced it would make its branding and marketing decisions independently—a move widely seen as a retreat from politically charged content policing. This underscores the growing role of financial and corporate entities in shaping what information flows freely online. For businesses who rely on digital marketing, social media advertising, and online payments, decisions like these can have a real-world impact on reach, engagement, and visibility.
But it’s also a question of morality. Should these corporations have a say in what we see and interact with at all? Or should it be placed in more objective hands?
The UK’s Online Safety Act: Protecting Children vs. Risks to Freedom
Categorisation and Oversight
The UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA) requires Ofcom to categorise digital services into regulatory tiers (e.g., Category 1, 2A, 2B). This categorisation determines compliance obligations but has already proven contentious due to its broad scope and limited routes for appeal.
Codes of Practice and Child Protection
In late 2024, Ofcom introduced its first Codes of Practice, requiring risk assessments for 17 categories of illegal harm, including child exploitation and hate content. By April 2025, platforms must conduct Children’s Access Assessments—evaluating whether young users can normally access services and, if so, applying robust protections.
Age assurance technologies are vital here. Ofcom distinguishes between:
- Age Verification (confirming exact age, often through IDs).
- Age Estimation (using algorithms to estimate whether a user is a child).
Both approaches are designed to reduce children’s exposure to harmful content, but they raise issues of privacy and anonymity. For web designers and developers like us at Gwe Cambrian Web, this highlights the importance of building websites that are not only functional and engaging, but also future-ready for new regulations. Similarly, for social media management, it underlines the importance of understanding how platforms may tighten rules on content and age controls—something that directly affects how businesses can reach and connect with audiences. Social media may not in the future be a viable source of marketing for a company aiming at younger audiences.
But the question remains, how else can we prove someone’s age? ID has been the driving factor of Age Verification for years – is ticking a box claiming that you’re above 18 enough?
Striking the Balance: Privacy, Freedom, and Child Safety
Privacy and Surveillance Risks
Digital IDs, if tied too closely to online access, risk creating a surveillance infrastructure where users’ online behaviours can be tracked and monitored. Linking IDs to payments or centralised databases could magnify these risks. How can we ensure that our idenities are being protected online? Should data be deleted as soon as it’s inputted, would that be enough to sway future users towards compliance?
Freedom of Information and Corporate Influence
Cases like Mastercard’s involvement with GARM reveal how private corporations can wield massive influence over online discourse. Even with Mastercard stepping back, the precedent shows how financial and technological infrastructures can be weaponised to suppress certain viewpoints. We have already seen this on X for example too – should corporations have a place in these spaces, or should more objective parties be brought in to monitor the web and ensure it is safe without a potential agenda behind it?
Protecting Children Responsibly
The intent behind the OSA is clear: children should not be exposed to harmful or inappropriate content. Yet overly strict enforcement of digital IDs or invasive age verification could stifle free expression and undermine user privacy for those who are old enough. Striking a balance is essential. For businesses and organisations, this means being prepared for changes to how social media platforms operate, how advertising is regulated, and how website features may need to adapt. Harmful content should be monitored as it has always been, but how can we go about this without invading users’ privacy?
The internet is being potentially changed by both safety regulation and technological identity systems. On one hand, protecting children and ensuring accountability online are vital. However, there is a very real danger that privacy, anonymity, and freedom of expression could be slowly eroded away in the processm, if we don’t do our due diligence.
For businesses, charities, and organisations across Wales and the wider UK—like those we work with at Gwe Cambrian Web—these debates are highly relevant. The future of digital identity, online regulation, and content moderation will shape how all of us interact online, whether through websites, digital marketing, or social media management. Accessibility, trust, and transparency are at the heart of building a successful online presence, and hopefully that will remain to be the case for years to come.
Digital IDs and censorship debates ultimately highlight a single truth: the internet must remain both safe and free, but doing so may be a more of a mountain task, as opposed to simply a stroll.
