Is the Online Safety Act censoring sexual health content?
Published: 1 June 2026
Judas Kelley reflects on some potentially troubling consequences of the Online Safety Act.
What is the Online Safety Act?
The Online Safety Act (OSA) and discussions of social media bans are sparking discourse around digital freedom, censorship, individual privacy, and online safety in the United Kingdom. Although the OSA was originally established in 2023, it aimed to implement online safety regulations in phases. As of July 25th, 2025, the newest phase has imposed significant legal obligations on platform providers to implement more robust measures to protect users (most notably children) from unwanted, dangerous, non-consensual, and illegal online activities. While the OSA defines ‘harmful content’ broadly, these policies implement age restrictions on legal but adult content for those under eighteen. Therefore, accessing age-restricted content requires users to present government-issued photo identification. Meanwhile, the OSA’s newest measures to regulate sexual content come with consequences that endanger the presence of vital sexual health (SH) information in the UK.
How the OSA Impacts Sexual Health Content
Public responses to the OSA justifiably criticise the government’s ability to censor information and to arbitrarily define content as ‘unsafe’ based on political agendas. The risks associated with wrongful restriction are most glaringly obvious in cases involving SH content. No part of the OSA deems educational SH content to be harmful or predatory. Yet, news reports following the OSA’s implementation indicate that non-harmful SH content, such as health information, LGBTQ+ forums, and violence support services, face unjust online censorship.
Stone’s (2025) interview with Zoe Williams from the London Vagina Museum warns that the OSA can widely impact SH information and education. SH resources, including educational institutions, cultural organisations, health services, advocacy projects, and violence support services, face restrictions under the OSA that prohibit them from establishing informative and accepting environments to discuss sex. The OSA is reportedly making it difficult for youth to find information about menstruation, female reproduction, LGBTQ+ identities, and sexual violence prevention. Greig (2025) documents cases of age verification preventing Reddit users from accessing subreddits relating to sexual health, sexual violence support, and gender-diverse communities. LGBTQ+ advocates and journalists further share warnings of how these policy changes can unfairly target sexual and gender minorities who depend on the Internet for community and education. The OSA’s impact is compounded by international political shifts influencing platform operations worldwide, as Meta is reportedly removing and censoring UK non-profit organisation pages providing advice about abortion services, LGBTQ+ support, and sex-positive education.
Why is Sexual Health Content Censored Online?
So why exactly does SH content face greater restrictions online, even though it is not illegal or harmful? Prior research indicates that SH educators (especially LGBTQ+ ones) face high rates of deplatforming, content removal, and algorithmic suppression worldwide. Global moderation research reflects how platforms respond to legislative pressure by implementing wide-sweeping moderation efforts that unintentionally target SH content. This is primarily due to the wrongful categorisation of SH content by moderation systems as ‘explicit adult content’. Although platforms are under pressure from governments to protect users, they seldom invest the time and money necessary to develop thorough, nuanced moderation systems that can avoid censoring non-harmful content. Therefore, automated moderators remain unable to distinguish between explicit sexual content and SH information, resulting in the restriction of SH content. Consequently, platforms evade financial and legislative accountability using cost-driven responses that prioritise profits over public safety. Platforms reinforce the offline sociocultural tabooing of SH information, which is leading to higher rates of teen pregnancy, STIs, and widespread SH misinformation. Due to platforms' monetary aims, the OSA’s unanticipated impact on SH jeopardises the survival of the few existing resources. This takes place, moreover, alongside sexuality education surveys across the UK, indicating a growing urgency to better provide young people with tools to navigate and understand SH. While platforms prioritise reducing financial repercussions from legislative pressure, they dismiss health and education needs that are vital for maintaining public health.
Sexual Health Education in the UK
Despite the mandatory inclusion of Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) in secondary school curricula, young adults in the UK report concerningly low confidence in their SH knowledge and skills. Services across the UK are often unavailable or curtailed due to lengthy wait times, privacy concerns, limited support in rural areas, fear of judgment, lack of LGBTQ+ competent care, and social stigma. Consequently, UK youth turn to the Internet for answers about SH. Online resources appeal to young people for a variety of reasons, including increased accessibility, community, diversity, inclusivity, information, and privacy. LGBTQ+ young adults in the UK emphasise their dependence on online platforms due to the absence of diverse experiences shared in school-provided RSE. Transgender and non-binary people in particular rely on e-services for sexual healthcare and information due to the lack of trans/non-binary-competent care available nationwide. It is undeniable that online SH resources are crucial for filling knowledge gaps and promoting confidence, education, and safety amongst young people.
What is coming next?
There is yet to be adequate data on the effectiveness of the OSA or a quantified assessment of its impact on online SH information. However, the early indications justify worries from those working to provide SH education and support. Greater concerns arise when considering how these policies can disproportionately harm youth from marginalised communities already facing systemic health barriers. The inevitable consequences of the digital suppression of information are increased public health and safety concerns, susceptibility to misinformation, and amplified social stigma. Paired alongside limited access to SH support, lengthy waiting times, and abstinence-based education, counteracting misinformation and promoting safe sex becomes a greater challenge. Therefore, as assessments of the OSA’s effectiveness progress, it is necessary for scholars to ask foundational questions about how policy impacts access to information. Whose interests are we considering when assessing the impact of Internet policies? Which questions do we need to be asking more? Are we approaching these conversations with nuance? Who does this policy actually protect, and who is being left behind?
Image credit: Thirdman on Pexels
- A relevant article in Open Democracy
- A statement from Basis Yorkshire, a specialist organization supporting women, non-binary people, and young people affected by sex work and sexual exploitation.
First published: 1 June 2026
<< Blog