On the new proposed laws published by the government today, big tech firms will have to abide by a legal duty of care to protect Children are media editor Amol Rajan has the details.

This is Frida, except that's not her real name.

And this isn't her real voice in her twenties now, she was just 13 when the grooming began online.

I got a message from an older man.

Just Hi, friend.

Request whatever on I added him because you're 13 and just try and add whoever you can on Facebook to try and seem like you've got loads of friends and stuff.

I don't think it took too long for it to get into him, asking for more pictures of me on, then sexual pictures of me and him sending me sexual pictures.

I still haven't reported it to the police.

I probably never will because of how long and painful the process could be.

I talked to the technology comes that dominate the Internet very, very often, and they would say about this kind of thing.

What we've built is good technologies.

We can to try to take this stuff.

What would you say to them if they're in the room now?

I'd ask them who is taking responsibility for this because currently the man who was groomed me does not take any responsibility for what happened on the tech.

Companies do not take any responsibility for what has happened, so the only person taking responsibility for it is me, which is horrible.

I am the only one facing up to what's happened.

I know call Secretary Oliver down and to make his statement.

The culture secretary today outlined some of the specifics.

A 13 year old should no longer be able to access pornographic images on Twitter.

YouTube will not be allowed to recommend videos promoting terrorist ideologies on anti Semitic Hate crime will need to be removed without delay.

As part of the proposals, senior managers could eventually face criminal prosecution, though that will require secondary legislation.

There will be exemptions for smaller firms so as not to stifle innovation on articles or comments on news websites will be unaffected to protect free speech.

I don't think those firms are taking it seriously enough, Ian Russell has been campaigning on this issue since the death of his daughter, Molly, who took her own life.

It later emerged she had seen pictures of self harm on Instagram, which is owned by Facebook.

There are things that they could have done better.

They could have included criminal sanctions to senior management.

Upfront on that would have put a bigger impulse to bring about change, which is much needed.

Urgent though these issues clearly are.

These proposals have bean years in the making are largely on tried on, still face huge practical challenges.

The sheer volume of material online put addressing this stuff beyond the reach off me man power.

Then there's the fact that one person's online harm is another's freedom off expression.

But despite all of that, a consensus has emerged in the West that these global data giants have had a free pass.

For too long.

Tech giants have invested billions in safety and say they welcome regulation.

These new rules probably won't be in place until 2022 leaving plenty of time for their lobbying.