In February 2025, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer stood beside U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance at a White House press conference and declared, “Britain has had freedom of speech for a very, very long time… and we guard it preciously.”
It was a confident reply to Vance’s stark warning that freedom of expression is “in retreat” across Britain and Europe. Starmer brushed aside the notion that the UK’s Online Safety Act represented censorship, saying the law’s focus was solely to protect children and tackle serious online harms.
But here’s the thing: as a British practicing journalist and simply as a person living here, I can tell you now. Free speech died here a long time ago.
Because what I see and hear every day suggests that our definition of free speech is narrowing. And while some of that change is quiet, some of it is loud and chilling.
The Law Says It’s “Free” But Only If You Behave
In the UK, unlike the U.S., freedom of speech isn’t absolute. It’s a qualified right under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. That means you’re free to express yourself until the government, the police, or another authority decides your speech might breach public order, national security, or someone else’s feelings.
That might sound reasonable on paper. But in practice, it has opened the door to all sorts of quiet censorship.
You Can Now Be Arrested for Praying in Silence
Let me tell you about Isabel Vaughan‑Spruce. She’s a volunteer and a person of faith who was arrested, not once, but twice for silently praying outside an abortion clinic in Birmingham. She wasn’t chanting. She wasn’t holding a sign. She wasn’t even speaking. Just standing there, thinking quietly to herself.
Police searched her, took her in, and logged her actions as criminal. This year, a court ruled her arrest unlawful and awarded her compensation. But the damage is done, isn’t it? The message was loud and clear: even your thoughts are being policed.
It makes me uncomfortable to write that sentence, but I think we need to face how surreal this has become.
Online Speech: Regulated by Algorithm
Since the Online Safety Act took full effect this summer, the digital landscape has changed dramatically. X (formerly Twitter) now hides or restricts protest footage and political content if it might be seen by minors.
I’ve watched powerful protest clips quietly vanish from timelines. In one case, footage showing police restraining a demonstrator during a protest outside a migrant hotel in Leeds was flagged as “potentially harmful” and made inaccessible to UK users. Not because it was fake. Not because it was violent. But simply because it might have been considered “too mature” for a teenager.
I completely agree that young children and teens shouldn’t be exposed to pornography or explicit nudity online. But there’s growing evidence that these filters are starting to affect what adults can see too. Protest videos, political commentary, even street reporting content intended for the general public is being removed or hidden under the banner of safety. And it makes me wonder: where does it stop? Will platforms like YouTube be next?
When people have to use VPNs just to view footage from protests happening in their own country, we have to ask ourselves are we being protected, or are we being quietly silenced?
Why I’m Worried
This isn’t about defending hateful speech or opposing protections for vulnerable people. We do need safeguards. But right now, it feels like the laws meant to protect us are being used to protect us from each other—and from our own awareness.
I’m worried because it’s getting harder to speak freely, write honestly, or even think aloud without first asking, “Will this be recorded? Flagged? Misunderstood?” I know other journalists feel it too. We’re adjusting our headlines, watering down opinions, and double-checking what might be perceived as risky.
That’s not what journalism should be. And it’s certainly not what free speech looks like.
Final Thoughts: The Right to Be Heard
Sir Keir Starmer said we guard free speech “preciously.” I want to believe that’s true. But if we can be arrested for praying in silence, if footage of protests is hidden from us online, and if our thoughts are quietly logged as “hate”—then it doesn’t feel like something we’re guarding.
It feels like something we’re losing.
And maybe, just maybe, we won’t realise how precious it was until it’s already gone. Because right now, I feel that it went a long time ago.
Hi, I’m Sarah Jade. I’m 25, Yorkshire born stubborn redhead, and just finding my feet in the wild world of independent journalism.I’ve always had this fire in me for telling real stories, the kind that actually mean something. I love the British spirit, the blunt honesty, the humour, and yes… I do get emotional about free speech and the truth. I’m not perfect, but I care deeply about people, fairness, and saying what others might be too scared to.
Thanks for posting this Sarah. I feel I could say a lot about free speech, or say little so that I don’t waffle or bore people. I’ll tend towards the
latter but probably end up saying too much.
Free speech has always been relative and over time it has been restricted to various extents. Recently, attitudes have been relaxed towards free speech, but not that long ago it was restricted for good reason – remember WW2 “Careless talk costs lives”. If anyone praised Hitler they could have been jailed.
However, today it is more subtle. We have social media, where people post things that thousands can view – people’s posts can provoke a reaction and things can easily flip out of control. Then we have the threat of legal action. If you say, or post, something and someone doesn’t like it, they can find a lawyer who will pursue the case.
On a more general note, I want to thank Sarah for setting up this site. We have engaged in a lot of discussion on Quora about issues facing the country. I think it’s right that we move some of that discussion off Quora.
Thank you honey, that means a lot. You’re absolutely right, free speech has never been a simple, all-or-nothing thing. The balance between expression and responsibility is tricky, especially now with how fast things spread online. I totally get what you’re saying about the shift from wartime censorship to today’s legal and social pressures.