Technology news and discussion on TalkFuse.
Criminal liability needed for tech executives causing child online harm, expert urges
Alex Cooney, chief executive of Irish charity CyberSafeKids, has called for social media executives to face criminal liability rather than fines for the harm their platforms cause children, arguing that current regulation is too slow and ineffective to protect a generation of children from serious online harm. Her warning follows the charity's annual report, which found little improvement in child online safety despite Ireland's Online Safety Code, and singled out gaming platform Roblox as a major and growing source of risk that many parents fail to recognise or understand.
The report, based on a survey of 6,000 primary school children, found that 70% of eight to 12-year-olds still hold accounts on apps meant for over-13s, 14 months after the safety code's introduction, and that 58% of children reporting negative online experiences said these occurred on Roblox. Children as young as five described being chased, stalked, threatened and pressured to strip during role-play games on the platform. Roblox said it had introduced age-checks for chat access since January and a real-time moderation system in March, but the report highlighted a regulatory gap, as gaming platforms have so far avoided the stricter EU oversight applied to large social media firms.
In short
- Charity boss demands criminal liability, not fines, for tech bosses over child harm
- Roblox report: 58% of children's bad online experiences occurred on the platform
- 70% of under-13s still use age-restricted apps despite Ireland's safety code
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that fines and slow regulatory processes have not protected children, so criminal liability could make senior executives prioritise safety and act more quickly when platforms expose children to serious, foreseeable harm. They see stronger personal accountability as proportionate when companies’ design and moderation choices can affect large numbers of children, including on services parents may not recognise as risky.
The case against
Critics argue that criminal liability could be unfair if executives are punished for harms they could not reasonably foresee or prevent across complex platforms, and that fear of prosecution may encourage blunt restrictions that limit children’s access to beneficial online spaces. They favour clear, enforceable safety duties, independent oversight and meaningful corporate penalties, with individual criminal sanctions reserved for deliberate or seriously reckless breaches.
Explained simply
Social media and gaming platforms let people create profiles, share content and communicate with others. Many services set a minimum age of 13, but younger children may still use them, and parents may not know what happens in games that include chat or role-play.
In Ireland, an Online Safety Code sets rules for certain online services, while EU law gives extra oversight to the largest platforms. Different rules can apply to gaming services and social media, making it harder to address risks across both. The debate is about how to protect children online and who should be held responsible when platforms fail to do so.
AI Cybersecurity Entertainment Gaming Technology World
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “‘We’re running out of time’: Online safety expert issues grave warning to parents on the hidden dangers of kids’ favourite Roblox as she reveals why simply fining big tech does nothing to make children safer”.