GENEVA — A group of United Nations experts is calling for stronger action against online pornography platforms, raising concerns about what they described as the large-scale exploitation of women and girls through sites operated by Aylo Holdings, the parent company of Pornhub.

The experts said companies involved in hosting, processing payments for, or directing traffic to such material cannot avoid responsibility when human rights violations occur on their platforms or through their services. “A red line must be drawn,” the experts said. “Systems that facilitate and profit from the sexual exploitation of women and girls cannot merely be regulated at the margins, they must be fundamentally confronted.”

They urged the governments of the United States and Canada to pursue full prosecution of Aylo and require third-party age and consent verification measures for all user-generated pornography websites. According to the experts, the United States did not provide a response. Canada, meanwhile, said it recognizes the need to “modernize the private sector privacy law” and introduce legislation aimed at holding social media providers accountable for harmful content.

The experts also said they believe similar concerns extend beyond Pornhub. “We are concerned that the abuse reflects a broader pattern on platforms such as Xvideos and X.com, which allow user-generated pornography without reliable age or consent verification,” they said. “Exploitation is further enabled through platform monetisation and the continued involvement of payment networks and search engines.”

Another point raised by the experts involved the burden placed on victims attempting to remove non-consensual content from online platforms. They said material often remained accessible despite repeated complaints and removal requests. “This creates a system in which victims are forced to chase their own abuse. They are constantly retraumatised and, even many years after the initial abuse while abusive material continues circulating,” they said.

The experts called for governments to impose binding requirements on Pornhub and other digital platforms that distribute pornography. “There is an urgent need for States to impose binding measures on Pornhub and other digital platforms distributing pornography,” the experts said. They pointed to measures such as mandatory third-party age and consent verification for all individuals depicted in content, along with stricter moderation and removal procedures for abusive or violent material involving children and adults who did not consent.

At the same time, the experts acknowledged changes Aylo has made in recent years, while arguing those steps followed pressure from lawsuits, victims and regulatory scrutiny. They referenced more than 25 lawsuits and action taken by the Federal Trade Commission. “Collectively, these actions led Pornhub to take down the majority of its content library since 2020, amounting to over 50 million unverified images and videos,” the experts said. “Aylo’s response makes clear that the company cannot credibly dispute its longstanding conduct in globally distributing and monetising the traumatic exploitation of victims on Pornhub.”

The experts also criticized the deferred prosecution agreement reached in December 2023 between Aylo and U.S. prosecutors, arguing it stopped short of full criminal accountability. Under the agreement, Aylo agreed to pay financial penalties and compensation to selected victims and accept outside monitoring for three years. If the company complies with the terms, the charges are expected to be dismissed in 2026 without a conviction being entered.

“The contrast is stark: individuals are imprisoned for trafficking, whilst the corporate entity that enabled and knowingly profited from the criminal enterprise on a large scale avoids conviction,” the experts said.

According to the statement, the experts have communicated directly with Aylo Holdings and with officials in the United States and Canada. They also said they have been in contact with payment companies previously connected to Pornhub transactions, including Mastercard and Visa, as well as technology companies involved in directing online traffic, including Google, Meta and Microsoft.

.

LOS ANGELES — Kickstarter has rolled out new “Mature Content” policies that prohibit projects involving adult entertainment and a wide range of sextech products, marking a notable shift for a platform that once helped launch several high-profile sexual wellness brands.

Under the updated rules, Kickstarter states that it “is not a venue for adult-only or sexually explicit content and such content is prohibited.”

The policy specifically bars “any project specifically stating it or the rewards being offered are being created for sexual pleasure,” along with “any project that distributes or enables distribution of pornographic content.” The restrictions also apply to sexual wellness devices that are “explicitly designed for sexual stimulation through insertion or penetration, or are intended to have body parts inserted into them.”

The new guidelines further prohibit sexual wellness products that are “marketed or presented primarily for sexual gratification in a manner that creates heightened safety or moderation concerns,” though the company has not publicly explained what standards it will use to determine those concerns.

Kickstarter’s revised policy still leaves room for some intimate products. Items that are not intended for insertion or penetration may remain eligible, provided they are “not marketed primarily for sexual gratification.” The company lists products such as “lubricants, nipple jewelry, and other intimate items such as bras and underwear” as examples that could still qualify.

A Change in Direction

The updated rules stand in contrast to Kickstarter’s earlier approach, which allowed a number of adult-oriented and sexual wellness campaigns to gain visibility — and significant funding — through the platform.

In the company’s earlier years, pleasure brand Dame launched a crowdfunding campaign for Fin, a finger-worn vibrator. The campaign faced initial resistance before eventually being approved, later reaching full funding within two days.

Spanish sexual wellness company MyHixel also found success on Kickstarter, using the platform for campaigns tied to its ejaculation-control strokers in 2018, 2022 and 2024.

Last year, Ohdoki introduced two new stroker sleeves through Kickstarter and ultimately secured more than $1.5 million in pledges.

In 2025, the insertable audio-enabled pleasure device Groove Thing raised $100,000 during the first 12 hours of its campaign before eventually surpassing half a million dollars in total backing.

The change is especially striking given Kickstarter’s own recent efforts to spotlight adult-adjacent creators. Last year, the company launched “Kickstarter After Dark,” a newsletter promoting projects tied to “adult lifestyle products and innovations,” along with “personal wellness technology” and “mature-oriented design projects.”

The newsletter carried the slogan, “Because NSFW deserves a home on Kickstarter.”

“Adult creators deserve the same spotlight and promotion as any other project on Kickstarter,” the company said at the time.

DUBLIN — Ireland is preparing to step deeper into the debate over online sexual content, with Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan planning legislation that would criminalize the possession and distribution of what he described as “extreme” pornography.

According to the Irish Independent, O’Callaghan, who leads Ireland’s Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, said his department is drafting proposals that would outlaw the production, distribution and possession of “extreme or violent pornography.” He said he hopes to bring the proposed legislation before the government within the next two months.

O’Callaghan told the newspaper that members of Ireland’s national police service have warned of what they believe is a “direct link” between online pornography and “serious sexual violence on women,” including incidents involving “nonfatal strangulation, degrading sexual acts, and coercion.”

“I’m not a person who’s interested in censorship, but I am going to bring forward proposals to criminalize extreme violent pornography,” O’Callaghan told the Irish Independent.

“I think it is necessary to introduce it and start it in order to protect young people, teenage children, young men, and women as well,” O’Callaghan said. “People are getting a distorted view of what human sexuality is about.”

Following the UK

The proposal in Ireland arrives as similar legislation has recently taken shape in the United Kingdom. Last month, the U.K.’s Crime and Policing Act introduced criminal penalties for depictions of “non-fatal strangulation” and sexual content involving adults portraying underage characters.

Momentum behind restrictions on “extreme” pornography in the U.K. increased earlier this year after the release of a government-backed pornography review that recommended banning adult material considered “degrading, violent and misogynistic.” Several of the arguments now being used in Ireland echo the language and themes contained in that review.

Speaking on the Irish podcast “Newstalk Breakfast,” Dr. Madeleine Ní Dhálaigh, vice chair of the Irish Medical Organization’s General Practitioners Committee, said, “So, modern pornography, we know that 90% of the scenes show an act of physical aggression and 95% of the time it’s directed against the woman who’s providing the content.”

Dhálaigh did not provide a source for those figures during the interview.

“The violence in pornography is real,” Dhálaigh argued. “It’s acted out by the content providers, but it is very real. That woman is experiencing pain and is being subjected to all forms of degradation and violence … These violent acts in pornography are informing domestic violence, informing teenage dating violence and informing the sexual scripts of our young people.”

Podcast host Anton Savage observed that, if the statistics cited by Dhálaigh are accurate, it could mean nearly all pornography would fall under a potential ban.

Dhálaigh responded, “Well, I think that this is a conversation we need to have.”

SARASOTA, Fla. — WebGroup Czech Republic (WGCZ), the parent company of XVideos, XNXX, BangBros and GirlsGoneWild, has reached a settlement with the state of Florida over allegations that the sites failed to verify the ages of Florida users before granting access to adult content.

The agreement requires WGCZ to implement age-verification measures across its platforms and pay $1.2 million to Florida’s Department of Legal Affairs.

The lawsuit, filed last year by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, named WGCZ, which operates XVideos.com, along with several affiliated companies. Those included NKL Associates, operator of XNXX.com; Sonesta Technologies, which operates BangBros.com; GGW Group, operator of GirlsGoneWild.com; and Traffic F, which operates TrafficFactory.com.

In the complaint, the attorney general’s office said it sought “to compel the pornographers to comply with their obligations under Florida’s age-verification law.” The filing also argued that every “knowing and intentional” violation of the state’s age-verification requirements amounted to an “unfair and deceptive trade practice” under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

Under the terms of the settlement, WGCZ’s websites may use users’ IP addresses to determine whether a visitor is located in Florida. That provision will remain in place for five years, a timeframe that appears tied to ongoing concerns about users bypassing geolocation systems through VPN services — a practice lawmakers and regulators in multiple jurisdictions have increasingly tried to address through both legislation and technology.

LONDON — Ofcom said Wednesday that it has opened investigations into two additional adult websites as regulators continue examining whether platforms are complying with the age-verification rules established under the U.K.’s sweeping Online Safety Act.

The regulator said it is investigating www.pimpbunny.com and www.kemono.cr to determine whether the operators behind the sites implemented what the law describes as “highly effective” age checks.

“Robust age checks are a cornerstone of the Online Safety Act,” an Ofcom statement said. “Sites that host pornographic material must use ‘highly effective’ age checks to determine whether a particular user is over 18, in order to prevent children from readily accessing that content.”

Under the Online Safety Act, “highly effective age assurance” measures include systems such as AI-assisted age estimation, identity verification tools and hybrid verification methods designed to improve accuracy in identifying and deterring underage users. The investigations arrive as age-verification technology continues drawing attention from researchers and critics alike, particularly after multiple reports suggested that some age-estimation systems can still be bypassed with simple disguises and other workarounds.

“We have prioritised action against these providers based on the risk of harm posed by the services they operate,” Ofcom added. “We have taken particular account of their user numbers, including where we have seen significant increases in their user traffic since age-check laws came into force last summer.”

Ofcom also provided updates on ongoing enforcement investigations involving www.fapello.com and adult tube platform www.xgroovy.com. The regulator said it had issued a decision regarding fapello.com, finding that the site breached age-verification and online safety obligations under the Online Safety Act. Meanwhile, the agency said it is widening its investigation into xgroovy after gathering evidence indicating the site may not be complying with formal statutory information requests tied to online safety and age-assurance requirements.

WASHINGTON — With the May 19 compliance deadline closing in, the Federal Trade Commission has begun putting major online platforms on notice over enforcement of the Take It Down Act.

The agency said warning letters were sent to a wide range of tech and social media companies, including Amazon, Alphabet, Apple, Automattic, Bumble, Discord, Match Group, Meta, Microsoft, Pinterest, Reddit, SmugMug, Snapchat, TikTok and X.

The law, approved by Congress and signed nearly a year ago, establishes a federal criminal ban on the publication of non-consensual intimate imagery, including AI-generated deepfakes shared without consent.

At the center of the measure is a strict notice-and-removal requirement. Platforms covered under U.S. law must remove flagged content within 48 hours after receiving notice. That enforcement window officially begins May 19. For a lot of companies, especially those handling huge volumes of user uploads every minute, the clock suddenly feels very real.

“We stand ready to monitor compliance, investigate violations, and enforce the Take It Down Act,” said Andrew Ferguson. “Protecting the vulnerable—especially children—from this harmful abuse is a top priority for this agency and this administration.”

“Under the law, ‘covered platforms’ include various websites, apps and online services, such as social media, messaging, image or video sharing and gaming platforms,” the FTC said in its statement. The agency added that unlawful sharing of covered material could lead to federal criminal prosecution, while violations of the notice-and-removal requirements would also be treated as FTC rule violations carrying civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation.

Attorney Corey Silverstein said adult industry companies should already be preparing for compliance and consulting legal counsel where necessary. In a recent blog post, Silverstein wrote, “For platforms that host user-generated content, creator content, private messaging, image or video uploads, live chat, AI-generated media, or adult content, this is not just a policy issue.

“It is an operational issue,” he continued. “A compliant policy is not enough if the platform cannot receive, review, track, remove, and prevent reposting of covered content within the required timeframe.”

The Free Speech Coalition raised similar concerns in late April.

Liability under the Take It Down Act applies to “any person who knowingly publishes [non-consensual] content using an interactive computer service,” the FSC said in a statement. “This targets the individual uploader/publisher, not the platform. … Platforms must post a clear, conspicuous, plain-language notice of their removal process and how to submit a request. … Failure to comply with the notice-and-removal obligations is treated as an unfair or deceptive act or practice under the FTC Act, enforced by the Federal Trade Commission.”

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Missouri lawmakers moved one step closer Tuesday to putting age-verification requirements for adult websites directly into state law, with the state Senate voting unanimously in favor of the proposal.

The measure now heads back to the House of Representatives for a final set of procedural actions, including a fiscal review, before it can be sent to Gov. Mike Kehoe for signature. Republicans currently hold supermajorities in both legislative chambers as well as the governor’s office, giving the proposal a clear path forward.

Three separate bills dealing with age verification — HB 1839 from Rep. Sherri Gallick, HB 2921 from Rep. Melissa Schmidt and HB 3015 from Rep. Jeff Farnan — were merged earlier this year into a substitute measure by the House Children and Families Committee.

That combined bill later cleared the House despite objections raised by progressive lawmakers and Democrats focused on civil liberties concerns. In the Senate, however, resistance was limited, and the legislation advanced without significant debate.

Under the proposal, websites in which at least 33 percent of content is considered harmful to minors or classified as pornographic would be required to verify the ages of users before access is granted. The language would apply not only to adult entertainment platforms but also to mainstream social media sites such as Reddit and X if they meet the threshold outlined in the bill.

Missouri officials have already pursued age-verification policies through regulatory action. Former Attorney General Andrew Bailey issued a non-legislative intervention in 2025, an effort later supported by his successor, Catherine Hanaway. Lawmakers backing the legislation say placing the requirement directly into state statute would make it more difficult for future administrations to reverse course.

In recent years, state lawmakers have been so active in their efforts to regulate and restrict adult content on the internet that it can be difficult to keep track of the various bills, proposals and amendments to existing law coursing through legislatures across the country. Below is a summary of the latest news on state legislation that has been debated, passed and/or come into force in 2026.

States in which new laws have recently come into effect:

Utah (SB 73): Utah’s amendments to the state’s age verification mandate for websites that offer adult material impose a 2% excise tax on all companies required to perform age verification under the law. It also replaces current Utah age verification law’s private right of action with enforcement by the Utah Division of Consumer Protection, which can issue fines of up to $2,500 per violation plus costs and damages awards to consumers ‘injured’ by a violation of the law. The law also makes companies liable for verifying the age of users located in Utah, even if the user is concealing their location through use of a VPN or other technical measure. Most of the law’s provisions are now in effect; the excise tax provisions take effect October 1, 2026.

West Virginia (HB 4412): HB 4412 requires websites that contain over 33-1/3% material deemed “harmful to minors” to verify the age of users, either through use of a government-issued ID or through transactional data. The law authorizes the West Virginia Office of Technology to create specific rules for how age verification must be performed under the law. HB 4412 also creates a private right of action to pursue actual damages from offenders, plus up to $10,000 per violation. The state attorney general is also authorized to bring actions against suspected violators $10k per day of violation, plus up to $250,000 if a minor can access the alleged harmful material. The law goes into effect on June 12, 2026.

States in which bills have passed in both legislative chambers, but aren’t yet in force:

Missouri (HB 1839): HB 1839 would enact heavier penalties for violating the state’s existing age verification mandate. These penalties include a fine of up to $250,000 if a minor can access “material harmful to minors” as defined under the law. The revised law would also lower the standard of knowledge required to create liability from “knowing or with reckless disregard” to “knowingly and intentionally.” Age verification under law must be performed by a third-party entity and does not allow for covered entities to propose an alternative age verification method, even if that method is shown to be equally effective as the methods proscribed by the law. HB 1839 passed in the Missouri Senate on April 30 and has been placed on the “informal calendar” of the Missouri House.

Iowa (HF 864): HF 864 would create an age verification mandate for websites on which 33% or more of the “data publicly available” is deemed “pornographic for minors.” Permitted age verification methods under the law include digital identification, any method which is “commercially reasonable given a person’s scope of business and that relies on transactional data to verify an individual’s age” and a “method approved by the attorney general by rule.” Under the law, the attorney general can bring actions for civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation, with a maximum penalty of $10,000 per day. The law specifies that each time an individual user accesses a website or app not in compliance with the law constitutes a separate violation. The latest version of the bill passed a House vote on April 30. If the bill is signed into law, it will take effect on July 1, 2026.

States in which bills have passed in a single chamber:

California (AB 1856): Last year, California passed the “Digital Age Assurance Act” (AB 1043), an act which required internet-enabled devices to data on collect users’ age brackets to be shared with mobile apps. AB 1856 would broaden the law to require that users’ age brackets be shared with websites, as well. AB 1856 passed in the Assembly Privacy committee and was referred to the Appropriations committee on April 27, 2026.

Ohio (HB 84): HB 84 applies to sites whereon a “significant or substantial portion” of the site’s content, revenue, stock-in-trade, or display space involves material that is “obscene or harmful” to juveniles. What precisely constitutes a “significant or substantial portion” is left undefined in the bill. The bill allows for government-issued photo IDs, public or private transactional data (employment records, credit card data, mortgage information and the like) processed through a commercial age verification system or third-party services that use the above, as acceptable methods of age verification. Under the bill, violations are a first-degree misdemeanor, with each day of noncompliance considered a separate offense. Both the organization and individual employees and officers of the organization can be charged under the bill. Minors (or their parents or guardians) can bring private civil actions seeking injunctive relief and attorney fees. HB 84 has been passed by the Ohio House and is now pending in the Senate.

Iowa (HF 2606 and SF 443): In addition to HF 864 (described above), the Iowa legislature is debating HF 2606 and SF 443, which also pertain to age verification, but with different provisions from HF 864. Like HF 864, HF 2606 (formerly known as HF 2274) holds that websites must verify the age of their users if over 33% of the “total amount of data publicly available” on the site is pornographic. HF 2606 also mirrors the civil penalties envisioned in HF 864, with the attorney general authorized to seek up to $1,000 per violation, with a maximum penalty of $10,000 per day. HF 2606 also requires the attorney general to “adopt rules to implement and administer the bill.”

SF 443 (previously designated SF 207) would apply to any “commercial entity for which it is in the regular course of the trade or business of the entity to create, host, or make available, on the internet, obscene material,” without the 33% threshold present in HF 2274. Under SF 443, the attorney general has “the sole authority to bring civil action to provide for civil penalties in an amount not more than one hundred thousand dollars.” SF 443 is currently pending before the Iowa Senate Technology Committee.

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah’s latest update to its age-verification law took effect this week, but critics say the changes could create major compliance headaches for online platforms while raising broader concerns about privacy and internet access.

The newly enforceable provisions under SB 73 expand the state’s existing age-verification requirements in several ways. The law now gives the Utah Division of Consumer Protection authority to enforce the mandate directly, prohibits platforms from encouraging users to bypass restrictions through virtual private networks (VPNs) or similar tools, and requires covered websites to verify the age of users physically located in Utah regardless of the IP address attached to the connection.

That last part is what’s getting the most attention.

In a statement posted Tuesday, the Free Speech Coalition warned that the law could complicate compliance strategies many platforms currently rely on.

“In practical terms, this means that compliance strategies that depend on IP addresses, such as geoblocking may not be effective at mitigating liability,” the organization said.

The group noted that even platforms already conducting age verification for Utah visitors could still face legal exposure if a resident uses a VPN to mask their location or if an IP address is incorrectly associated with another nearby state such as Arizona or Nevada. And honestly, that’s where the situation starts to feel messy fast. Internet geography has never exactly been precise.

FSC Executive Director Alison Boden said the updated law creates a difficult environment for websites attempting to comply.

“Determining geolocation based on IP address is imperfect,” Boden said. “With SB 73, Utah is effectively overriding the laws of every other jurisdiction and requiring platforms to age-verify every single visitor to their sites. Platforms should discuss how to approach this situation with their attorneys.”

The organization also pointed out that another section of SB 73 — a new 2% excise tax on adult content sales within Utah — is scheduled to take effect Oct. 1, 2026.

Privacy advocates and digital rights groups have also raised concerns about the law’s provisions surrounding VPNs.

Critics argue the restrictions could create constitutional issues while weakening online privacy protections not only for Utah residents, but potentially for internet users more broadly. VPNs are commonly used for far more than bypassing geographic restrictions. Many people rely on them for security, encrypted browsing, or simply keeping personal data away from advertisers and data brokers.

In an analysis of SB 73, Rindala Alajaji, associate director of state affairs for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argued the law’s new provisions are unlikely to stop determined minors from accessing restricted content.

“Won’t stop a tech-savvy teenager, but they certainly will impact the privacy of every regular Utah resident who just wants to keep their data out of the hands of brokers or malicious actors,” Alajaji wrote.

She added that the broader implications extend beyond Utah itself.

“Attacks on VPNs are, at their core, attacks on the tools that enable digital privacy,” Alajaji said. “Utah is setting a precedent that prioritizes government control over the fundamental architecture of a private and secure internet, and it won’t stop at the state’s borders.”

Additional guidance and policy analysis surrounding SB 73 has been made available through the Free Speech Coalition’s policy resources and action center for members and non-members seeking more information about the law and its implementation.

The fear is real. That’s probably why this debate has gotten so heated so fast.

Parents worry about what kids are seeing online. They worry about pornography, self-harm content, predators, manipulative social media algorithms, all of it. Most people — honestly, probably almost everyone — agree children shouldn’t have unrestricted access to harmful material online.

But critics of the current push for age verification laws say governments and tech companies are moving too aggressively, and with consequences that could permanently reshape online privacy and anonymity.

What started years ago with a simple “Are you over 18?” checkbox has evolved into something much larger. Across multiple countries, age-verification systems now increasingly rely on government IDs, facial scans, video uploads and even biometric data. And with every new layer of verification comes another question hanging in the air: Where does all that information go?

When Data Is Collected, It Eventually Leaks

The risks tied to large-scale data collection are no longer theoretical. Last October, chat platform Discord disclosed that hackers had accessed records belonging to more than 70,000 users through a third-party vendor handling age-verification services for the company. The breach reportedly included photographs of government-issued identification documents.

Privacy advocates argue that incidents like that are almost inevitable when sensitive personal information is stored in centralized databases. The more valuable the data becomes, the larger the target grows for cybercriminals. And while major companies may invest heavily in security, critics say the broader ecosystem of smaller platforms and vendors often remains vulnerable.

Even outsourcing age checks to specialized verification companies does not eliminate the risks, opponents argue. In some ways, they say, it concentrates them. Businesses whose primary function revolves around storing identity information become attractive targets for hackers and potentially lucrative repositories for consumer data.

And there’s another concern quietly lingering beneath the surface: monetization. Companies that collect vast amounts of personal information may eventually face pressure to commercialize that data in some form, particularly if verification services become expensive to maintain.

There Are Few Trusted Players in This Debate

Governments have also faced scrutiny over their handling of age-verification systems.

The European Union recently introduced a mobile application intended to help verify users’ ages online. Security researchers quickly claimed they had identified major vulnerabilities in the system, with at least one hacker publicly stating flaws were discovered within minutes of testing.

At the same time, calls continue growing for large technology companies to handle age verification directly at the operating-system level. Supporters argue companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft already control the devices people use daily and could enforce protections more effectively than individual websites.

Apple recently announced new age-assurance measures in the United Kingdom, adding fuel to that debate.

But critics remain deeply skeptical about expanding the authority of major tech companies over identity verification and internet access. Those companies, they argue, already built much of today’s advertising-driven internet economy around large-scale data collection and behavioral tracking.

Opponents question whether giving technology giants even more control over who can access apps, websites and digital services would create additional risks surrounding surveillance, competition and consumer privacy.

Concerns Extend Beyond Children’s Accounts

Privacy advocates argue the broader implications stretch far beyond protecting minors.

Many fear that widespread age verification could gradually normalize mandatory identification for nearly all internet activity, regardless of whether the content involved is legal, adult-oriented or politically sensitive.

Technology companies already respond to large volumes of government data requests every year, many involving user information. Critics argue that if governments increasingly require digital identities tied to verified credentials, it could create new mechanisms for tracking online activity and restricting access.

Some opponents warn the systems could eventually expand beyond age restrictions into other forms of digital gatekeeping, including nationality-based restrictions or politically motivated blocks.

Questions surrounding international precedent also continue surfacing. If one country mandates government-linked digital IDs for internet access, critics ask, how long before others follow? And if platforms possess verified identity systems tied to millions of users, what pressure might governments place on those companies to share information or restrict access?

Privacy advocates say anonymity online remains important not only for ordinary users, but also for whistleblowers, dissidents, abuse victims and people seeking sensitive information or support services.

Without anonymity, critics argue, many people may simply stop speaking openly.

Pressure Should Shift — But Not Entirely to Big Tech

Even many critics of age-verification mandates acknowledge technology companies still bear responsibility for protecting younger users online.

Advocates for alternative approaches argue companies should focus more heavily on improving parental-control systems at both the device and application level. Those controls, they say, should be easier to locate, easier to understand and more effective for families trying to manage children’s online access.

Rather than creating universal identification systems for all internet users, critics argue decision-making authority should remain primarily with parents and guardians.

Some privacy advocates also argue that any age-verification system adopted in the future should remain narrowly limited to platforms presenting the highest potential risks, such as pornography sites or certain social media services.

And if governments ultimately decide some form of verification is unavoidable, critics insist strict technical safeguards must be built into the systems from the beginning.

Among the proposals frequently discussed are device-based verification conducted entirely on the user’s phone or computer, temporary facial-age estimation systems that immediately discard biometric data, anonymous “yes or no” age confirmations transmitted under end-to-end encryption, and open-source code allowing independent experts to inspect how the systems operate.

The Core Debate Isn’t Going Away

For opponents of sweeping age-verification systems, the larger issue is not whether children should be protected online. Most agree they should.

The argument instead centers on whether the current solutions risk creating a permanent infrastructure for surveillance, identity tracking and expanded corporate control over internet access.

Critics also point toward the broader economic incentives shaping online platforms. Many argue the advertising-driven business model dominating large parts of the internet encourages companies to maximize engagement, collect personal information and keep users — especially younger users — constantly connected.

Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has publicly supported age-verification measures for years. Critics argue those efforts may also help shift responsibility for youth safety away from platforms themselves and toward app stores, device makers and governments.

Meanwhile, lawmakers across multiple countries continue searching for ways to address growing public concern over online harms affecting children.

And that’s really the tension sitting underneath all of this. Almost nobody disagrees there are dangers online. The disagreement is about how much privacy society is willing to surrender trying to solve them — and whether those tradeoffs can ever truly be reversed once they become normal.