Fact check: Are the United States going to follow United Kingdom’s lead in the children’s online safety act?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, the United States is not directly following the United Kingdom's lead in children's online safety legislation, though both countries are pursuing similar objectives through different approaches.

The US has developed its own legislative framework with the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which has passed the Senate and aims to protect children and teens online by holding tech companies accountable for platform content and giving parents more control ^{[1] [2]}. However, the US approach differs significantly from the UK's Online Safety Act in both scope and implementation methods ^[3].

Key differences emerge in the regulatory approaches: while some US states have enacted laws with similar goals to the UK's Online Safety Act, concerns over free speech and government overreach have created resistance to adopting the UK model directly ^[3]. There is notable opposition from Trump allies who have criticized the UK's approach as having "chilling" effects on online safety rules ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several crucial pieces of context:

• Implementation challenges: The UK's Online Safety Act has faced significant practical difficulties, including Wikipedia losing its challenge against verification rules ^[5] and widespread user concerns about age verification systems ^[6].
• US criticism of UK approach: American officials have expressed concerns that the UK's human rights record is worsening due to its online safety regime ^[4], suggesting the US views the UK model as problematic rather than exemplary.
• Alternative regulatory philosophy: US advocates of digital regulations are being warned to take notice of the issues with the UK's law, indicating that the UK serves more as a cautionary tale than a model to follow ^[6].
• State-level variations: The analysis reveals that individual US states are pursuing their own approaches rather than waiting for federal legislation to mirror the UK model ^[3].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit assumption that the US is considering or likely to follow the UK's lead, when the evidence suggests the opposite. This framing could mislead readers into believing there is momentum toward adopting the UK model when:

• Opposition exists at high levels: Trump allies are actively criticizing the UK approach ^[4]
• Structural concerns dominate: Free speech and government overreach concerns are driving US policy away from the UK model ^[3]
• Implementation problems are evident: The UK's own struggles with enforcement and user acceptance serve as warnings rather than encouragement for US policymakers ^{[5] [6]}

The question's phrasing suggests inevitability ("going to follow") rather than exploring whether such alignment is likely or desirable, potentially biasing readers toward expecting convergence when the evidence points toward divergent regulatory philosophies between the two nations.