• PayPal acknowledged freezing the account of U.K. children’s rights campaigner Molly Kingsley due to her criticism of COVID-19 policies, reigniting debates on free speech and corporate censorship.
• Kingsley’s account was terminated after PayPal compiled a dossier on her, citing passages from her book criticizing pandemic measures, such as mandatory vaccinations and school closures.
• The case was not isolated, with other critics of pandemic policies, including Toby Young and the group Law or Fiction, also having their PayPal accounts frozen during the same period.
• The Financial Conduct Authority intervened, leading to Kingsley’s account being reinstated after 22 days, and thousands of PayPal users boycotted the platform in solidarity.
• The incident highlights a broader trend of financial censorship, with examples from Canada and the U.S., and raises questions about accountability, transparency and the role of corporations in shaping public discourse.

PayPal has acknowledged for the first time that it froze the account of a prominent U.K.-based children’s rights campaigner due to her criticism of COVID-19 policies, including school closures and mandatory vaccinations. The admission has reignited debates over free speech, financial censorship and the role of corporations in policing dissent.

Molly Kingsley, founder of the parent campaign group UsForThem, was informed by PayPal in September 2022 that her account had been terminated due to “the nature of its activities.” Documents disclosed during pre-action correspondence reveal that PayPal compiled a dossier on Kingsley over four months, citing excerpts from her book, The Children’s Inquiry, which criticized pandemic measures.

The dossier highlighted passages such as: “Some may maintain that restrictions applied to children were a necessary evil. We say that a public health paradigm which strives to protect adults without weighing up the costs to children is the very antithesis of ‘public health.’” Another excerpt criticized the stigmatization of children with mask exemptions: “In our new world, children with mask exemptions were often forced to wear a lanyard or other symbol, signaling their disability to the rest of their cohort.”

PayPal’s admission marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over corporate power and free speech. The company stated that Kingsley’s account was frozen because of “content published by UsForThem relating to mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations and school closures,” which it claimed violated its “acceptable use” policy.

A pattern of financial censorship

Kingsley’s account was reinstated 22 days later after the U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) intervened, demanding an “urgent explanation” from PayPal. However, her case was not isolated. Other critics of pandemic policies, including free speech advocate Toby Young and the lockdown-critical legal group Law or Fiction, also had their PayPal accounts frozen during the same period.

Law or Fiction described the debanking as “a blatant assault on free speech, as practised in China.” Young, who runs the Daily Sceptic blog, said: “I’ve long suspected that the reason PayPal closed the accounts of UsForThem as well as the account of my lockdown sceptics website is because it wanted to shut down criticism of our government’s pandemic response.”

The backlash was swift. Thousands of PayPal users boycotted the platform, closing their accounts in solidarity with those affected. Critics accused the company of failing to provide clear explanations or specify how individuals or groups had violated its policies.

Government surveillance and corporate complicity

Kingsley’s case also sheds light on the broader context of government surveillance during the pandemic. Her social media activity was monitored by the U.K.’s Counter Disinformation Unit, which collaborated with tech companies to suppress discussions critical of lockdown measures.

“PayPal appears to have admitted what we had suspected all along: that it was engaged in politically motivated debankings of those of us who criticized the government’s response to COVID, and the lockdown narrative in particular,” Kingsley said. “For more than two years, PayPal has resisted my efforts to uncover what happened.”

PayPal has denied any political bias, stating: “We are not able to comment on individual customer accounts; however, we base all reviews of our customers’ use of PayPal services on their compliance with our policies. We apply an objective approach to these reviews, one that is not driven by politics.”

A global trend of financial censorship

The targeting of lockdown critics by PayPal is part of a growing trend of financial institutions wielding their power to suppress dissenting voices. In Canada, the government froze bank accounts of protesters and their supporters during the 2022 truckers’ protests against vaccine mandates. In the United States, federal investigators reportedly asked banks to flag transactions using terms like “MAGA” and “Trump” as part of broader surveillance efforts.

In the U.K., Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform Party, had his accounts closed by Coutts, a private bank owned by NatWest Group. Initially justified on commercial grounds, internal documents later revealed the decision was politically motivated, based on Farage’s views being at odds with the bank’s values.

Access to banking and financial services is essential in modern society, enabling individuals and organizations to operate effectively. Denying these services based on political or ideological views disrupts financial stability and silences dissenting voices, undermining free speech and democratic participation.

As Kingsley’s case demonstrates, the line between corporate policy and political censorship is increasingly blurred. The implications for free speech and financial freedom are profound, raising urgent questions about accountability, transparency and the role of corporations in shaping public discourse.

Sources include:

ReclaimTheNet.org

Telegraph.uk.co

FreeSpeechUnion.org