Free Speech in retreat

Ofcom’s Iron Grip shows the UK turn its back on British values

In February 2025, a tense exchange unfolded in the Oval Office between UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and US Vice President JD Vance. Vance challenged Starmer face-to-face, asserting that UK policies, like the Online Safety Act, infringe on free expression. Starmer swiftly countered, saying he was proud of the UK's long-standing tradition of free speech, adding it “will last for a very, very long time."

What has lasted a very, very long time has been the government's Ofcom restrictions on broadcasting information about covid. It is now 2025, yet they have not been rescinded. They continue to prohibit discussion that may be “potentially harmful”. This could, for example, effectively stop conversations questioning covid vaccine efficacy, as challenging official claims might deter uptake of a vaccine still deemed life-saving. Ofcom fined GB News £100,000 for such content, and in one instance tried to make presenter Mark Steyn personally liable, likely pushing broadcasters and presenters to prioritise other topics.

Why, in 2025, can’t broadcasters freely explore Covid’s legacy? Perhaps it’s less about specific fears of what people might hear and more about a broader anxiety over losing narrative control in an increasingly sceptical society.

The UK has in fact slipped to 3rd tier in global free speech rankings according to the 2025 Index on Censorship. However, the USA is at the same level as the UK on these rankings and fares worse on academic freedom. The Article 19 Global Expression Report puts the UK at 33rd out of 161. The Index on Press Freedom puts the Uk in 23rd place out of 180 and the USA at 55.

Figure 1: Global free speech rankings - random selection of countries

The UK is turning its back on British values once held dear. As Starmer champions a legacy of free expression, the reality – reflected in rankings and restrictions – paints a stark retreat. Don’t wait around for the mainstream media to report on the Ofcom guidance.

Here is just one example of an OfCom ruling from February 2021.

"This sanction related to two episodes of Full Disclosure, a current affairs programme, broadcast on 11
February 2021 at 17:00 and 12 February 2021 at 11:00. Ofcom’s investigation found that the
programmes contained materially misleading and potentially harmful statements about the
Coronavirus pandemic and vaccine rollout, including but not limited to, the following:

• repeated assertions were made that having a vaccine is equivalent to being infected with the
  live Coronavirus, and that catching Coronavirus was as safe, and could even potentially be
  safer, than receiving a vaccine;

• that there had been a number of serious side effects or medical complications from taking a
  Coronavirus vaccine, including that a pregnant woman had a miscarriage “within hours or
  within days” of taking a vaccine;

• that alternative treatments for the Coronavirus were available but were being deliberately
  withheld from UK patients for financial reasons;

• that young people “are not affected” by the Coronavirus; and

• that in Wales, Coronavirus “was not even in the top ten biggest killers in the country”. "

But Prime Minister Keir Starmer still thinks free speech is alive and well so that's all right then.