The Global Online Safety Regulators Network

The Global Online Safety Regulators Network brings together independent regulators to cooperate across jurisdictions. We do this by sharing information, best practice, expertise and experience, to support coherent and coordinated approaches to online safety issues.

The rules and procedures of the network are set out in the Terms of Reference. 

The Network has recently created two working groups to deepen understanding and collaboration on focus areas: the Education and Awareness Working Group and the Technology Working Group.

In October 2024, the Network published the Online Safety Regulatory Index, collating members' approaches to online safety regulation.

The Index is designed to support comparison of online safety regulatory frameworks, collaboration between regulators and regulatory coherence. By understanding the areas of consistency and divergence in regulations, regulators can aim to ensure that the online safety of internet users in our respective countries does not stop ‘at the border’ and that companies can benefit from economies of scale.

Use the Index to better understand the online safety regulatory environment of member countries.

Membership of the Global Online Safety Regulators Network is open to regulators with legislated online safety functions, who meet criteria on independence from political and commercial interference, and are committed to upholding human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Current members include:

• eSafety Commissioner – Australia
• Arcom – France
• Autoriteit online Terroristisch en Kinderpornografisch Material (ATKM) – the Netherlands
• Coimisiún na Meán – Ireland
• Council for Media Services – Slovakia
• Film and Publication Board – South Africa (Vice Chair)
• Korea Communications Standards Commission – Republic of Korea
• Office of Communications (Ofcom) – United Kingdom (Chair)
• Online Safety Commission – Fiji 

The Network also wants to engage those who are looking to establish online safety regulation or are eager to learn from the shared experiences of this group of like-minded regulators. The Network might give observer status to different groups as the Network progresses and regulatory frameworks develop.
 
Observers will be organisations and stakeholders working on online safety issues and committed to working collaboratively with independent online safety regulators. This can include civil society, policymakers, multilateral organisations, and industry groups.

Current observers include:

• 5Rights
• Childlight – Global Child Safety Institute
• Department of Canadian Heritage – Canada
• European Parliament Intergroup on Children's Rights 
• Family Online Safety Institute – Global
• Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia-Diensteanbieter e.V. (FSM) – Germany
• INHOPE
• Integrity Institute
• Internet Watch Foundation
• National Communications Commission (Taiwan)
• National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC)
• National Media Commission (Ghana)
• Netsafe – New Zealand
• NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights
• Red Papaz
• Te Mana Whakaatu | Classification Office – New Zealand
• The Canadian Centre for Child Protection – Canada
• WeProtect Global Alliance

If you would like more information, or to receive a member or observer application form, please email current chair of the Network – Ofcom: Ofcom.International@ofcom.org.uk

As part of its global leadership in online safety, the Network drafts position statements on online safety issues with input and collaboration from all members.

Position statements focus on online safety issues and aim to deliver the objective of establishing a respected, clear and influential collective voice of independent online safety regulators

Position Statement on human rights and online safety

This statement articulates the Network’s shared commitment to championing a human rights-based approach to online safety regulation and harm prevention.

Position Statement on regulatory coherence and coordination 

This statement articulates the Network’s approach to regulatory coherence and coordination, including setting out our activities for pursuing coordination, the benefits of regulatory coherence, and the opportunity costs of not doing so.