Jump to content
Awoo.

Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in


Detective Shadzter

Recommended Posts

Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in

David Cameron unveils deal with big four providers based on charity's proposals to protect children from sexual content

Ben Quinn

The Guardian

Tuesday 11 October 2011

Someone-watching-pornogra-007.jpg

People who want to watch pornography online will have to 'opt in' with their internet service providers under measures to be announced by the PM. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.

There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or services which they believe are inappropriate for children.

The site, which will direct complaints to the regulator dealing with that specific area of concern, is expected to be run by watchdogs including the Advertising Standards Authority, BBC Trust, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council and Pan European Game Information.

The service providers involved are BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin. Customers who do not opt in to adult content will be unableto access pornographic websites.

Cameron gave strong backing in June to the Mothers' Union proposals after he commissioned a six-month review by the charity's chief executive, Reg Bailey. However, Cameron did not commit to legislation.

Bailey's recommendations included providing parents with one single website to make it easier to complain about any programme, advert, product or service, putting age restrictions on music videos and ensuring retailers offer age-appropriate clothes for children.

Cameron wrote to Bailey in June to thank him for his report. "I very much agree with the central approach you set out," the letter said.

"As you say, we should not try and wrap children up in cotton wool or simply throw our hands up and accept the world as it is. Instead, we should look to put 'the brakes on an unthinking drift towards ever-greater commercialisation and sexualisation'."

Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans.

However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well intentioned but having the government decide what someone can and can't look at on the internet doesn't sit well with me in any case.

Not that I care much because I can still watch all the porn I want over here in Murika.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically, it’s not the government deciding that you can’t look at porn. But it is the government making you have to jump through an unnecessary hoop in order to do so, not to mention pretty much declaring to your ISP that you want to look at porn, which ought to be between you and your Johnson.

I thought most ISP’s already had child safety features to block undesired content? Why should ISP’s be expected to go this extra mile to do something that is really down to parents to deal with? Unless this is just a measure to help ISP’s make more money out of their customers who want to opt into porn? Will they charge more for the customers who want it? This seems completely unnecessary and, frankly, I’m surprised to hear it from Cameron’s government, since it smacks of the kind of overt nanny-state control of the previous Labour government, something I would have thought Cameron would want to distance himself from. Sadly, if this has the support of the coalition and the opposition (and I sincerely doubt that Labour has become a bastion of individual liberty in the year since they were voted out), there’s really going to be no stopping it. I really do hope it’s just Cameron who’s so enthusiastic about it.

I’m wondering now if FurAffinity or even deviantART will be included in the list of pornographic sites, since you can find porn on both of them, and I happen to post my art on those sites. Really, I do wish the government could just keep its nose out of things like this. I don’t draw porn, but I’ll be tempted to start and to start posting it to 10 Downing Street if this law passes.

Hmm... Maybe I could draw Mr. Cameron taking it up the behind from an anthropomorphic lion...?

Oh aye, I’d be remiss if I didn’t post this.

Edited by Eon
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*does victory dance because he lives in South America*

I mean.

I support this because the children need protection these days.

ph34r.png

Right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too am concerned about what will be considered porn and what won't really. It'll be kind of humilating to have to call my ISP and say "Yes hello there fine sirs I wish to look at pornography" just so I can continue using deviantART. And think of all the poor innocent kids who use sites like deviantART and are automatically blocked from seeing mature content without ever realising it (dA will not allow you to turn off the mature filter if you are under 18 - thus any poor 14 year olds who were utterly honest when signing up and don't even know the site contains mature content may find themselves unable to use it).

They're gonna offend a looooot of people who have a less conservative, blurrier line between what is porn and what isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry kids, you can still watch porn the old fassion way, like rumaging through your older brother's movie collection and magzines.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*laughs*

Wow this is too serious. Why can't parents supervise their kids right these days? USA is winning.............for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just in the UK, or is it in The US as well?

Not that it matters, but I'm just wondering.

Cause I'm checking DA right now, and I'm hoping they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't parents supervise their kids right these days?

Right, cuz our parents know what we are doing.

I'm only 18, but I want this. I want the security of knowing my future kids arn't doing that. Will it keep them from getting to it at all? Prooobably not. Unless there is a way for a computer to tell which images have sex in them, I don't think it's going to be perfect, but it would still be a load off my mind.

I live in the U.S., but I want this here. I once typed youtube wrong and ended up in bad places.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no angel but I'd really like if the temptation wasn't there.

Edited by Chaos Walker
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want the security of knowing my future kids arn't doing that.

Then you should teach your children why they shouldn't look at porn, why you find it inappropriate, why you believe they would benefit from not looking at it. Will they still do it? Probably. At the very least you can instill a mindset that will make them think twice about it. But if you can't stop your children from doing something, it doesn't become the government's job to stop them.

Again, it's nice and all that they want to prevent children from being exposed to porn, but it teeters on the edge of censorship and even invasion of privacy (of course your ISP doesn't give a fuck what you look at but that doesn't make it less uncomfortable to call them up and ask for access to porn). It's not a fair trade to protect kids when parents should be doing that themselves.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there is no absolute way this is going to get abused at all. Never. /sarcasm/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*ring ring*

Yes, I'd like to watch some pornography now. Thank you. Say, can I speak to whoever is in charge of surfing the internet for porn sites to block access to? I'm certain he's got some recommendations to offer.

  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this is a UK thing? Can't say I agree with it seeing how others may take it as an example and it may work it's way to the U.S and other Territories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is probably a good thing.

People will forget porn exists.

Rule 34 will be long gone.

It's a win lose situation.

The normal people will have great childhoods and the freaks and furries will die off.

I approve.

Edited by Cynical
  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that would even pass in the US.

Which Amendment would that violate again?

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

camron

y u take our pr0nz

This is pretty ridiculous. Can't kids just be reasonably supervised while on the internet? And aren't there already Parental Controls on most computers/browsers nowadays?

Edited by Swiss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pfft, don't they realise that denying people access to something just makes them want it more? D:

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see what the problem is. Sign up for porn, and life goes back to normal. What exactly are you are losing here?

Edited by Chaos Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see what the problem is. Sign up for porn, and life goes back to normal. What exactly are you are losing here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe that when it comes to an issue like pronz, you shouldn't have to call into your internet provider and tell them you want your pronz. Even though they have your browsing history anyway it's still pretty incriminating, not to mention embarrassing to some.

Provider: "This is -- customer support how can I help you?"

Customer: "Yes, it's John Doe of 123 Fake street, account number 1337... I noticed I cannot acquire my pornographic sites anymore on my personal computer."

Provider: "So are you saying you would like to opt back into full service, including pornographic material?"

Customer: "...y....ye...yes..."

Provider: "Okay sir, you may access your porn now.... pfft....pervert."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.