Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Oct 2011 15:22 UTC
Internet & Networking "BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin will be asked to offer customers the option to block adult content during subscription According to new measures to be announced by Prime Minister David Cameron, online pornography watchers will have to place a special request with their Internet Service providers (ISPs) to watch pornographic or sexualised content online. The prime minister is holding a summit at No.10 today with 30 media and retail executives, including broadcasters, magazine editors, trade bodies and advertisers, said the Daily Mail. Cameron is expected to announce the crackdown after Mothers Union charity chief executive Reg Bailey submitted a report on the matter after six months of study." The fact that this can happen in Great Britain just goes to show how brittle concepts like freedom of speech really are. Where people in the Arab world fight for the kinds of freedom we have, we in the west just hand them over to extremists. Un-frakking-believable. Any British folk in here? How on earth did you guys let this happen?
Thread beginning with comment 492528
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by TheIdiotThatIsMe on Tue 11th Oct 2011 15:58 UTC
Member since:

I read through the article linked, and I don't see much in the way of surrendering freedom of speech. Mostly what I'm seeing is that children age 15 and under can't be "brand ambassadors (not sure what exactly that is), can't be used for peer to peer marketing campaigns, and that ISP's will have consumers opt-in to access adult material.

I don't see anyone of already legal age's ability to view adult material being limited in any way. Have we really reached a point where we are up in arms over having to click a checkbox under account settings or during signup that allows us to view adult material? All it does it make access to a certain part of the internet *optional*, not restricted. This could be very useful for parents, businesses, public computers, etc. I honestly don't see much difference between this and optional software and services that already offer this.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Um?
by brucedjones on Tue 11th Oct 2011 16:01 in reply to "Um?"
brucedjones Member since:

I would just like to clarify that this system is opt-in, as in, if you want adult content to be blocked you have to opt-in. Those people who dont opt-in will have unrestricted service as usual.

Whilst I appreciate that OSnews publishes many informative articles in the interest of protection of the freedom of expression, this freedom has not been removed in the UK. could you please alter this rather sensationalist headline to reflect the truth.

edit: third parties have been offering this service for years, move along people, nothing to see here.

Edited 2011-10-11 16:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Um?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 11th Oct 2011 16:08 in reply to "RE: Um?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:

Read more carefully. Adult content will be blocked - unless you specifically tell your ISP you want access to it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Um?
by boofar on Tue 11th Oct 2011 16:10 in reply to "RE: Um?"
boofar Member since:

Consider this:
A leaked list of subscribers who have opted out (or neglected to opt out) of the ability to access porn is not very interesting. On the other hand, a similar list of people who have opted *in* would be real juicy stuff. I wonder who you could find on that list. Politicians? Memebers of the "Mothers Union"? I wonder what your tabloid press would be willing to pay for something like that...

(edit: typo)

Edited 2011-10-11 16:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Um?
by phoudoin on Tue 11th Oct 2011 16:45 in reply to "Um?"
phoudoin Member since:

"... and that ISP's will have consumers opt-in to access adult material. "

Which should be opt-out, not in.
Otherwise, sorry, but yes that's by default institute Internet censorship.
Today it's presented as legetimate thanks to the fight against child pornography flag, but who could warrant you that it wont expand tomorrow to illegal downloads sites, then wikileaks like sites, and so on?
In fact, I bet it will expand *exaclty* this way, because it's already written on the wall. The wikileak story show it, with absolutely no legal ground either for PayPal, Amazon, the swiss bank, it's mirror french hosting company. But you could bet that may this *feature* where there, they'll have use it as crisis control, and still outside any legal ground.

Any opt-in ISP censorship/filtering is de facto the proof that by default you don't have anymore access to Internet, only Internet but all Internet.

Regarding child and pornography specific issue, I fail to see why an opt-out would not work as fine: parents will be fine I guess with that.

And explain me how this *feature* in a family with both adults and kids, kids could be protected from porn while adults living there too could still access it (and don't tell me that parent have no right to watch porn :-) )?!

This opt-in is a Troy horse. Dressed in a moralist cover.

Best solution is that all new subscribers ask systematically for opt-in, which will goes back to square one this madness.

Edited 2011-10-11 16:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Um?
by UglyKidBill on Tue 11th Oct 2011 20:39 in reply to "RE: Um?"
UglyKidBill Member since:

+1 !

Reply Parent Score: 1