Some people should never have a smartphone – and I want to tell you about one of them. For the past couple of decades, Paul had a classic Nokiabrick-style phone. He could make calls – even send the odd text if we were lucky. But, a few years ago, he got a smartphone. At first, nothing changed much. He was reconnecting with friends, discovering emojis – there were no concerns. It has only been recently that the phone has become a problem, and that’s because he has stumbled across social media. And he is on it constantly.What do we know about Paul? He has time on his hands and, having grown up in an era when encyclopedias were the main source of knowledge, he has little media literacy when it comes to analysing sources and figuring out which ones he should trust. I can see why he probably takes it for granted that what he reads on his phone is true.According to people who’ve known him a while, Paul went from talking about birdwatching to sharing interviews featuring Tommy Robinson, to saying that migrants are taking our jobs, to embracing fake history and conspiracy theories found on YouTube. By this point, if Paul watched a video that claimed Stonehenge was a portal to another dimension and built by giants, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him engage in an online war to defend it.The Online Safety Actis now partly enforceable. Paul might make you think a bit harder about it. Understandably, much of the conversation surrounding it has been focused on protecting children, but there is a glaring hole in this legislation regarding the protection of adults. Despite a2022 reportfor the Ministry of Justice finding that the role of the internet in radicalisation pathways “was most evident for older rather than younger individuals”, the Tory governmentbacked out from provisionsthat would have prevented adults from seeing “legal but harmful” content online over fears about freedom of speech. But, if the2024 UK riotstaught us anything, it is how quickly adults can be roused to extremist mobilisation – even bymisleading poststhat may have been shared in all innocence.Ofcom reportsthat misinformation, including content that discriminates on the grounds of a protected characteristic, is the most likely form of potential harm adults will encounter online. With 52% of adultsusing social mediaas a form of news consumption, the risk of falling down a far-right rabbit hole is only going to increase. And Mark Zuckerberg’s decisionto remove independent factcheckingfrom Meta platforms will only make social media more of a breeding ground for fake news. In the UK, 77% of those aged 65 and overdescribe Facebookas their main form of social media – and as research carried out by Dr Sara Wilford, a lead researcher on the EU-funded research projectSmidge(Social Media Narratives: Addressing Extremism in Middle Age), suggests,it is older userswho are most vulnerable to this change. As they are not “digital natives”, everything they have learned online has been self-taught, so they tend to trust content at face value and are reluctant to factcheck. With the Online Safety Act neglecting them, they are (literally) left to their own devices.Making matters worse, everyone’s favourite billionaire, Elon Musk, the owner of X, is spreading his own misinformation about his newfound obsession: Britain. Nearly two million people saw Musk’sretweet of a fake Telegraph articlethat claimed the prime minister was planning on sending far-right rioters to “emergency detainment camps” in the Falklands. Most people saw the post for what it was – and Musk deleted it when it was shown to be total nonsense – but it looked real. So how can someone who is computer illiterate, who wouldn’t even twig if a bot were messaging him on Facebook marketplace wanting to exchange his used VHS tapes for a handful of beans, understand the need to be cautious when someone such as Musk – rich, powerful, chronically online – spreads fake news? And what is infuriating is that these tech bros seeminglydon’t care: Musk and Zuckerberg appear to be too busy fighting over who gets to go to Donald Trump’s birthday party to have a second thought about their users.It is such a shame. By all accounts, Paul had always been tolerant and open-minded. Over time, with what he read and absorbed, he became so angry. And he’s not that unusual.About one in fiveinternet users are unaware that apps and websites use algorithms to tailor what they are being shown. Many people do not recognise that what they are consuming online is diluted and biased; there are older people just like Paul who cannot get out of this cycle because they truly don’t know they are in it. It is troubling how many algorithms are nowpushing more extreme content. I have noticed on my own X account an increase in explicit photos of women and pro-Trump views – even people I have blocked, such as Laurence Fox, have somehow been popping up on my feed.I don’t blame older people, or think they’re stupid, for being taken in by what is often very sophisticated content. I am in my early 20s – a digital native – and I sometimes fall for fake content, too. I was totally fooled by the AI-generated image ofKaty Perry at the 2024 Met Gala(and so, apparently, was her mum). Sometimes my friends and I can’t tell if an image or video is deepfaked. If we don’t take precautions now, what will it be like when this technology becomes even more advanced?This Labour government has been so preoccupied by the threat of the left that it has left the door wide open for the far right. Until something is done, and encoded in legislation, we run the risk of more riots, more attacks, more lies. The government must review the Online Safety Act to make sure that everyone, regardless of age, is protected from fake news and far-right propaganda online – before fact becomes completely indistinguishable from fiction.April O’Neill is the winner of The Guardian Foundation’s2025 Emerging Voices Awards(19-25 age category) recognising young talent in political opinion writingName has been changed
Far-right online content is a danger to children – but I’ve seen how it can radicalise older people, too | April O’Neill
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Concerns Raised Over Online Radicalization of Older Adults Amidst Growing Misinformation"
The Guardian
6.4
TruthLens AI Summary
The article discusses the concerning impact of far-right online content on individuals, particularly highlighting the case of Paul, a man who transitioned from using a basic mobile phone to a smartphone. Initially, Paul's engagement with social media was harmless as he reconnects with friends and learns about digital communication. However, he quickly becomes immersed in misleading and extremist content, transitioning from innocent interests like birdwatching to sharing conspiracy theories and anti-migrant sentiments. This shift is attributed to his lack of media literacy, which leaves him vulnerable to believing and disseminating false information without critical analysis. The author points out that while the Online Safety Act aims to protect children from harmful online content, it neglects the adult population, particularly older individuals like Paul, who may be less equipped to navigate the complexities of the internet. Despite evidence suggesting that older adults are often radicalized online, the government has refrained from implementing necessary protections for fear of infringing on free speech.
The article further emphasizes the alarming trend of misinformation affecting older adults, particularly as they increasingly rely on social media for news consumption. With platforms like Meta reducing fact-checking measures and influential figures like Elon Musk spreading fake news, the risk of older users falling into extremist ideologies grows. The author notes that many older internet users are unaware of how algorithms shape their online experiences, leading them to trust misleading content at face value. This lack of understanding, combined with sophisticated disinformation tactics, poses a significant threat to social cohesion. The author calls for a reassessment of the Online Safety Act to ensure comprehensive protection for all age groups against the rising tide of fake news and far-right propaganda. Without legislative action, the potential for increased societal unrest and radicalization looms large, highlighting the urgent need for a more inclusive approach to online safety.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article delves into the dangers posed by far-right online content, particularly focusing on how it can influence individuals like Paul, an older man who, after acquiring a smartphone, became increasingly radicalized through social media. It highlights the need for greater protection against harmful online content, not only for children but also for adults, particularly older individuals who may lack the media literacy to discern credible information from misinformation.
Influence on Public Perception
The article aims to raise awareness about the potential for radicalization among older adults due to their increased exposure to unregulated online content. By sharing Paul's story, the author illustrates how easily someone can transition from benign interests to extremist views. This narrative intends to generate concern and prompt discussions about online safety legislation that currently focuses primarily on children.
Legislation Gaps
The author points out significant shortcomings in the Online Safety Act, which, while making strides towards protecting children, neglects the protection of adults. This gap raises questions about the government's prioritization of free speech over the potential for radicalization among older populations. By emphasizing this oversight, the article seeks to advocate for a more inclusive approach to online safety regulations.
Manipulative Elements
There are elements of manipulation present in the article, particularly in the way it portrays the impact of social media on a vulnerable individual. The emphasis on Paul's lack of media literacy serves to evoke sympathy and concern, potentially leading readers to advocate for stricter controls on online content. This approach may inadvertently simplify complex issues surrounding freedom of speech and censorship.
Trustworthiness of the Information
The information presented appears credible, as it draws on real experiences while referencing a report from the Ministry of Justice. However, the anecdotal nature of Paul's story may lead some readers to question its representativeness. The article is persuasive, utilizing emotional appeal to underscore the risks posed by unchecked online content.
Connections to Broader Issues
When compared to other news articles focused on online safety and radicalization, this piece shares similar themes regarding the influence of social media on various demographics. The narrative aligns with ongoing discussions in society about the responsibilities of tech companies and the government in regulating online content, especially in light of recent events such as riots and protests.
Potential Societal Impact
This article could influence public opinion, potentially leading to increased pressure on lawmakers to amend existing legislation for broader protections against harmful online content. It could also affect how society views older adults' engagement with technology, possibly leading to initiatives aimed at improving digital literacy among this demographic.
Target Audience
The article is likely to resonate more with communities concerned about the rise of far-right ideologies and the safety of vulnerable populations. It aims to reach readers who are invested in social justice, online safety, and the mental health implications of technology use.
Economic and Market Implications
While the article itself may not directly impact stock markets, it contributes to the ongoing discourse about tech regulation, which could influence policy decisions affecting tech companies. Investors in firms that specialize in online safety technologies might pay closer attention to such narratives, anticipating potential government contracts or funding opportunities.
Global Context
In a broader context, the article ties into ongoing global debates about misinformation, radicalization, and the role of social media in shaping public discourse. It connects with contemporary issues regarding freedom of speech versus the need for safe online environments, particularly relevant in the wake of various global protests and movements.
Artificial Intelligence Consideration
There is no clear indication that AI was used in the writing of this article. However, if AI had been employed, it may have influenced the narrative structure or choice of language to evoke stronger emotional responses. The use of AI could have been aimed at maximizing engagement through tailored content, though this remains speculative. In summary, the article effectively highlights the risks of radicalization through online content, particularly for older adults, while advocating for more comprehensive online safety measures. The persuasive narrative and emotional appeal contribute to its overall impact, though it also raises questions about the balance between regulation and free expression.