The UK’s communications regulator, Ofcom, has announced new guidelines to combat online sexism, threatening to publicly identify technology platforms that fail to protect women and girls from abuse1. This “name and shame” approach forms part of the regulator’s duty under the Online Safety Act 2023. However, the measures have drawn immediate criticism from campaigners and politicians who argue that without legal enforcement, they lack the necessary power to force meaningful change from major technology companies1, 8, 9.
The guidelines focus on improving user reporting mechanisms and platform accountability. Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom’s chief executive, described the current process for reporting online abuse as “soul destroying” for users1. She emphasized that public transparency would serve as a “very strong incentive” for platforms to adopt the recommended measures, stating that “it’s lots of small steps that together will help to keep people safer so that they can enjoy life online”1.
Technical Framework and Platform Requirements
The guidelines specify several technical and procedural requirements for technology platforms. These include implementing centralized privacy settings where all account safety controls are located in one easily accessible place. Platforms are also expected to develop collective reporting functions that allow users to report multiple abusive comments or accounts simultaneously, rather than being forced to report them individually. Additionally, the guidelines call for de-monetization of content containing sexual violence, preventing perpetrators from profiting from such material1.
These technical requirements represent significant engineering challenges for platform operators. Centralizing privacy settings requires substantial user interface redesign and backend system integration. Collective reporting mechanisms demand sophisticated content analysis algorithms and database management systems capable of processing batch reports. The de-monetization requirement necessitates advanced content classification systems that can automatically identify harmful material and disconnect it from advertising revenue streams.
Enforcement Challenges and Regulatory Limitations
The voluntary nature of these guidelines has become a focal point of criticism from security and policy experts. Andrea Simon, executive director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, stated that “until we have a legally enforced mandatory code of practice, we don’t think we’ll really see a shift in tech platforms taking this issue seriously enough”1. This concern is amplified by Ofcom’s limited enforcement track record to date, having issued only two fines under the Online Safety Act. One of the fined platforms, 4Chan, has refused to pay its £20,000 penalty and launched legal action in the United States1.
The enforcement challenges highlight the difficulty regulators face when attempting to police global technology platforms. Former Secretary of State Baroness Nicky Morgan expressed disappointment that the measures emerged as guidelines rather than legally binding rules. She warned that while some platforms may opt to comply, “some just won’t care and will carry on with the deeply harmful content that we see online today”1. This regulatory gap creates significant challenges for organizations attempting to maintain safe online environments for their users and employees.
Impact on Users and Organizational Security
The announcement was supported by testimonies from women who have experienced targeted online abuse. Demi Brown, a women’s sport advocate and influencer, revealed she has been forced to mute certain words and use the block button extensively due to trolling about her weight and appearance. She stated, “I don’t think that we should be worried about the online space, it should be a place where we can authentically be ourselves”1. Sahra-Aisha Muhammad-Jones, founder of a running club for Muslim women, noted that negative direct messages and comments can deter younger women from being online altogether, explaining that “there is the side to social media that is really harmful and really scary, and you have to be on alert all the time”1.
These personal accounts demonstrate how online abuse can directly impact organizational participation and digital engagement. In the sports sector, Chris Boardman, chair of Sport England, wrote to Ofcom during the summer about the treatment of women in sport online. He highlighted abuse suffered by athletes including Lioness footballer Jess Carter, who faced racial abuse, and tennis star Katie Boulter, who received death threats. Boardman argued that the same AI and algorithms used for marketing should be leveraged to curb abuse proactively1.
International Context and Regulatory Precedents
The UK’s actions occur within a broader global conversation about online safety regulation and its technical implementation. Australia has announced a world-first law to ban social media for children under 16, aiming to reduce the “risks” children face online, though the measure has received some pushback according to research data10. Meanwhile, the United States Commerce Secretary has urged Europe to “reconsider” its rules for big tech companies if it wants lower US tariffs on steel exports, highlighting the international political and economic tensions surrounding tech governance10.
This is not the first time a UK standards body has targeted systemic discrimination through regulatory measures. In 2017, the Advertising Standards Authority announced a plan to address advertisements that perpetuate sexist stereotypes, such as men being incompetent at housework or girls being less academic than boys10. The current Ofcom guidelines represent a continuation of this approach, adapted for the more complex technical environment of social media platforms and online services.
Relevance to Security Professionals and Organizational Response
For security teams and technology leaders, the Ofcom guidelines highlight several critical areas requiring attention. The emphasis on improved reporting mechanisms aligns with broader security operations center (SOC) requirements for efficient incident reporting and tracking. The technical specifications around content moderation and abuse prevention share common ground with existing security controls for spam filtering, malware detection, and unauthorized access prevention.
Organizations should review their current content moderation systems and user reporting workflows against Ofcom’s recommendations, even if not legally required. Implementing robust logging and monitoring for abuse reports can provide valuable threat intelligence about emerging patterns of harassment. The technical requirements for batch reporting and centralized privacy controls may require architectural changes to user management systems and content moderation interfaces.
Security teams can leverage existing security information and event management (SIEM) systems to track patterns of abusive behavior across platforms. Implementing automated analysis of reported content can help identify coordinated harassment campaigns more effectively. Additionally, organizations should consider how their current authentication and authorization systems support the privacy control requirements outlined in the guidelines.
Conclusion and Future Implications
Ofcom’s “name and shame” strategy represents a significant step in addressing online abuse, but its effectiveness remains uncertain due to the voluntary nature of the guidelines. The tension between regulatory oversight and platform autonomy continues to challenge efforts to create safer online environments. As technology evolves, so too must the approaches to mitigating harm, requiring ongoing collaboration between regulators, platform operators, and security professionals.
The international dimension of this challenge cannot be overstated, with differing regulatory approaches emerging across jurisdictions. The balance between effective oversight and freedom of expression remains delicate, particularly when regulating powerful, US-based tech giants. This tension was highlighted earlier this year when US Vice President JD Vance expressed the White House’s growing fatigue with other countries attempting to regulate American tech businesses1. The success of voluntary measures will likely determine whether more stringent legal requirements emerge in the future.
References
- “Ofcom vows to ‘name and shame’ over online sexism,” BBC News, Nov. 25, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4e8l2d2l3vo
- “Ofcom vows to ‘name and shame’ over online sexism,” Yahoo News, Nov. 25, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://news.yahoo.com/ofcom-vows-name-shame-over-120000588.html
- Savant Recruitment Insights, “Industry news feed referencing the BBC article,” [Online]. Available: https://www.savantrecruitment.com/insights
- The Guild of Television Camera Professionals (GTC), “Industry news feed referencing the BBC article,” [Online]. Available: https://www.gtc.org.uk/news
- Savant Recruitment, “Employer Zone page featuring the Ofcom announcement,” [Online]. Available: https://www.savantrecruitment.com/employer-zone
- Yahoo News, “News aggregator page featuring the Ofcom story,” [Online]. Available: https://news.yahoo.com
- “Standards body unveils plan to crack down on sexist advertisements,” The Guardian, Jul. 18, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jul/18/standards-body-unveils-plan-to-crack-down-on-sexist-advertisements
- BBC News, “Various international news articles providing context on tech regulation and online safety,” [Online]. Available: https://www.bbc.com/news
