Congress warns British social media changes are an attack on free speech
Members of the US Congress have warned Lisa Nandy that plans to prioritise the BBC and other government-trusted news sources are an attack on free speech.
The Culture Secretary announced in June that the government was considering requiring platforms such as Meta, Google and YouTube to give greater prominence to content from public media services such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4.
The government said it was part of a broader push to tighten regulation of the sector and combat misinformation. But the move has faced scrutiny from American-owned tech companies, who say they are being unfairly targeted.
In a letter to Ms Nandy on Tuesday shared with The Telegraph, Jim Jordan, the chairman of the House judiciary committee and an ally of Donald Trump, said the rule “would serve as a major threat” to online speech and “infringe on the rights of American companies.”
Mr Jordan said: “Several of DCMS’s [Department of Culture, Media and Sport] proposals would hurt the free, competitive marketplace of ideas, and instead prioritise state-sanctioned media outlets with the goal of influencing the scope and direction of public discourse.
“Many of DCMS’s proposed reforms would serve as a major threat to online speech and expression and infringe on the rights of American companies and their users. We write to express our serious concerns with these proposed reforms and to request a briefing on DCMS’s ongoing consideration and prospective implementation of any such reforms.”
Government sources fear that trustworthy news outlets are increasingly undermined by the growth of algorithm-promoted content, sometimes generated by artificial intelligence.
Ofcom figures show that three-quarters of young people aged 16-24 mainly consume news through social media, and more than half of all British adults list social media as one of their main news sources.
Ministers are also considering widening public service media status to include online-only providers, extending free-to-air protections for major sporting events to on-demand viewing, and consulting on a shift to internet-based TV from 2034 or 2044.
The plans have fuelled Washington’s growing belief that American tech companies are being unfairly singled out by the British government, putting ministers on a collision course with the US president, who sued the BBC for defamation in 2025.
A memo published by The Telegraph last autumn included evidence that BBC Panorama had “doctored” a speech by US president, making it appear he had directly called for violence on the day his supporters stormed the US Capitol.
This prompted Mr Trump to sue the broadcaster, demanding $10bn (£7.5bn) in damages.
Key figures in the administration, including the president, believe Britain has profited off unfair levies that mainly target American tech companies for too long. This includes the government’s digital services tax, in retaliation for which Mr Trump has threatened to punish Britain with “100 per cent” tariffs unless it is dropped.
Britain introduced the tax, a 2 per cent levy on the revenues of social media, search engines and online marketplaces with revenue of more than £500m, in April 2020.
The government’s proposals to protect public media services are part of a broader overhaul of Britain’s public service media system to help broadcasters compete with streaming platforms.
In June, Sir Keir Starmer announced that the age limit for most social media – including Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and Snapchat – would rise from 13 to 16.
He also suggested the measures, to come into effect in 2027, could be extended to 17 and 18-year-olds, with an overnight curfew added to stop teenagers’ endlessly scrolling online.
The Trump administration criticised plans for Australian-style age restrictions, arguing that they could harm freedom of speech and that parents should be mainly responsible for regulating their children’s social media use.
The ban is also expected to include Mr Trump’s social media site, Truth Social.
Read the full article here.