The Online Safety Bill is now on track to becoming signed into law, which, as usual, can only mean one thing – more overreach from a government hostile to the native population. On the surface, it projects itself as a virtuous ambition to eradicate harm from the internet, but inside, it has many more profound implications that threaten all of us. Of course, who would argue against stamping out content which encourages self-harm, drug use, and terrorism? However, that isn’t the aim because, as always, the real intent lies further in the details.
So, who will hold a lot of the power?
Well, that falls squarely on OFCOM, headed by Michael Grade, who, according to his Wikipedia page, is the son of a prominent Jewish show business family originally called Winogradsky—someone with a long CV entailing very senior roles in the BBC, Channel 4, and ITV. Not to mention a life peerage with the Conservative Party in the House of Lords. I’m sure these organisations’ journalistic and political integrity fills you with a lot of confidence, and they would never promote someone who spreads misinformation and hatred.
But what powers will he hold after this Act comes across King Charles’ desk?
OFCOM will now have the authority to demand “any information that they require for exercising, or deciding whether to exercise, any of their online safety functions.” From any platform which “provides a user-to-user service or a search service which appears to have, or to be able to generate or obtain information required by them.” It’s very loose language, but most likely intentionally, so everyone comes under the umbrella they wish to interrogate.
As you expect, there are some get-out clauses, making it out that what OFCOM are doing is constructive as their primary aim would be to “make recommendations that they consider would improve the experiences of users.” However, in layman’s terms, Michael Grade gets to decide, using any information he sees fit, to suggest to the government to create further legislation and policy on how you interact with the Internet of Things.
But indeed, are you safe with WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal?
Unfortunately for you, if they refuse or hand over information “which is encrypted such that it is not possible for OFCOM to understand it, or produces a document which is encrypted such that OFCOM can’t understand the information it contains, [or] the person intended to prevent OFCOM from understanding such information.” Then, you would be a criminal under this Act and will be prosecuted accordingly.
So what does this mean?
As nationalists, we hold a high standard with how we conduct ourselves, publicly and privately. But if you thought having a private conversation would stay between you and a friend and wouldn’t be used to bring in new powers to stamp it out, then you are mistaken. So, now more than ever, viewing everything you do online is imperative as a direct representation of yourself and the organisation you belong to.
