I hate to direct traffic to people like that, but, you know, how about their actual "study"? I realize that the "journalists" at the Guardian aren't willing to provide the actual source link, but it's not hard to find.
Their methodology involves searching for suggested terms. They find the most outrage-inducing or outrage-adjacent terms offered to them at each step, and then iterate. They thereby discover, and search for, obfuscated terms being used by "the community" to describe the content they are desperately seeking.
They also find a lot of bullshit like the names of non-porn TV shows that they're too out of touch to recognize and too lazy to look up, and use those names to gin up more outrage, but that's a different matter.
This is, of course, all in the service of whipping up a moral panic over something that doesn't fucking matter to begin with.
Thank you for linking the source material, unfortunately it badly contradicts you. It clearly shows that the _very first_ list of ten suggested search terms contained (pretty heavily) sexualised suggestions.
I suppose some of that stuff could reasonably be called "sexualized". Pornographic? No. A problem? Not unless you have really weird hangups.
Here's a unified list of all the "very first list" suggestions they say they got. I took these from their appendix, alphabetized them, and coalesced duplicates. Readers can make their own decisions about whether these justify hauling out the fainting couch.
+ Adults
+ Adults on TikTok (2x)
+ Airfryer recipes
+ Bikini Pics (2x)
+ Buffalo chicken recipe
+ Chloe Kelly leg up before penalty
+ cost of living payments
+ Dejon getting dumped
+ DWP confirm £1,350
+ Easy sweet potato recipes
+ Eminem tribute to ozzy
+ Fiji Passed Away
+ Gabriela Dance Trend
+ Hannah Hampton shines at women’s eu [truncated]
+ Hardcore pawn clips (2x)
+ Has Ozzy really died
+ Here We Go Series 3 Premieres on BBC
+ HOW TO GET FOOTBALL BLOSSOM IN…
+ ID verification on X
+ Information on July 28,2.,,,
+ Jet2 holiday meme
+ Kelly Osbourne shared last video with [truncated]
+ Lamboughini
+ luxury girl
+ Nicki Minaj pose gone wrong
+ outfits
+ Ozzy Funeral in Birmingham
+ pakistani lesbian couple in bradford
+ revenge love ep 13 underwater
+ Rude pics models (2x)
+ Stock Market
+ Sydney Sweeney allegations
+ TikTok Late Night For
+ TIKTOK SHOP
+ TikTok Shop in UK
+ TIKTOK SHOP UK
+ Tornado in UK 2025
+ Tsunami wave footage 2025
+ Unshaven girl (3x)
+ Very rude babes (3x)
+ very very rude skimpy
+ woman kissing her man while washing his [truncated] (2x)
https://globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/tikto...
Their methodology involves searching for suggested terms. They find the most outrage-inducing or outrage-adjacent terms offered to them at each step, and then iterate. They thereby discover, and search for, obfuscated terms being used by "the community" to describe the content they are desperately seeking.
They also find a lot of bullshit like the names of non-porn TV shows that they're too out of touch to recognize and too lazy to look up, and use those names to gin up more outrage, but that's a different matter.
This is, of course, all in the service of whipping up a moral panic over something that doesn't fucking matter to begin with.