The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) could soon be granted the authority to audit pornography websites and social media platforms for “extreme content” and illegal material, according to a report from The Times.

The Times, founded in 1785 as the Daily Universal Register, is the oldest national daily newspaper in the UK.

The proposed plan is part of a government-commissioned review, known as the Independent Pornography Review, led by Conservative peer Baroness Gabrielle Louise Bertin.

If implemented, the BBFC would certify compliant websites with “good practice” accreditation, while non-compliant sites could face regulatory sanctions from Ofcom under the UK’s Online Safety Act.

Currently, the BBFC is responsible for classifying pornographic videos sold in UK sex shops, but it has no oversight of online adult content. Under the new proposal, the BBFC would:

• Conduct “spot checks” on porn sites and social media platforms to ensure removal of illegal or harmful material.
• Certify compliant sites with a “good practice” accreditation.
• Refer non-compliant websites to Ofcom, which could then impose financial sanctions, disrupt business models, or block site access.

An unnamed government source quoted in The Times stated:

“Pornography that includes degradation, threats, and coercion, or that could encourage child abuse, simply isn’t tolerated offline, but in the online world, it is rife.”

The Independent Pornography Review is expected to recommend that Ofcom use its full regulatory powers, including:

• Imposing advertising restrictions on non-compliant sites.
• Cutting off payment providers to platforms that fail to meet BBFC standards.
• Blocking access to websites that repeatedly violate UK online safety laws.

While the exact definition of “extreme pornography” remains unclear, the government review reportedly claims a link between violent or extreme content and harmful sexual behaviors.

The report references a US study suggesting that men who consume pornography frequently are more likely to attempt or express interest in replicating behaviors seen in adult films.

However, critics argue that censorship concerns and a lack of conclusive research make these proposals problematic.

Melodie Garcia and Dr. Allison Grossman of the Woodhull Freedom Foundation criticized such measures, stating:

“Pornography is often used as a scapegoat for sexism and sexual violence, or as a pretext for censorship of sexual health or education.”

They argue that a focus on regulating pornography is misguided and that more effective approaches exist to combat sexual violence.

If implemented, the BBFC’s expanded authority could have major implications for adult content creators and platforms operating in the UK.

• Adult industry leaders may challenge the new regulations, arguing that independent audits infringe on freedom of expression.
• Sites like X (formerly Twitter) and Reddit could face stricter oversight if they fail to remove content deemed “extreme”.
• Major adult platforms may pull out of the UK market entirely, as seen in Utah and Texas, where age verification laws led to Pornhub blocking access to users in those states.

The Independent Pornography Review is expected to be published soon, with UK ministers reviewing its recommendations.

A BBFC spokesperson declined to confirm or deny whether the organization will be given enforcement powers but stated:

“We look forward to the report from the ‘Independent Pornography Review,’ which we expect to be published imminently.”

With the UK’s Online Safety Act (the UK’s age verification law) already introducing stricter internet regulations, this latest move could push the country toward some of the toughest digital content restrictions in the world.