David Cameron cracks down on online pornography [UK]
Source: The Guardian
Every household in Britain connected to the internet will be obliged to declare whether they want to maintain access to online pornography, David Cameron will announce on Monday.
In the most dramatic step by the government to crack down on the "corroding" influence of pornography on childhood, the prime minister will say that all internet users will be contacted by their service providers and given an "unavoidable choice" on whether to use filters.
The changes will be introduced by the end of next year. As a first step, customers who set up new broadband accounts or switch providers would have to actively disable the filters by the end of this year.
The moves will be announced by the prime minister in a speech to the NSPCC in which he will unveil a series of measures to reduce access to pornography with a particular focus on illegal child pornography.
Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jul/22/david-cameron-crackdown-internet-pornography
TM99
(8,352 posts)This is just another damned example of authoritarian control at the governmental level. I am sure there are more pressing economic or foreign policy matters that Cameron could be expending his political capital on instead of this kind of bullshit.
go west young man
(4,856 posts)England is heading backwards to the Iron Age.
alp227
(32,026 posts)Diego_Native 2012
(65 posts)What Cameron is attempting to do is to shame people wholesale. It is the "Father State" attempting to exercise thought control over an entire country.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)Super Nanny state, indeed.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)I mean,...what's the fascination?
rpannier
(24,329 posts)(Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre)
This is probably a way he sees to getting what he wants without paying for it
It also feeds into the stupid who believe there are simple solutions to all life's problems
DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)So the people are given a "choice"... they can have a filter installed.. or NOT.
Not exactly a crackdown on porn.
This is just putting the cost of the filter on the internet providers, instead on the home user.
I can see how some parents might want to turn on the filter, but never knew how to do it themselves.
It will be interesting to see what the majority of people choose.
Btw, in the USA... porn is watched equally by men and women. It goes back and forth 49/51 in percentages almost every year.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...to register as either a good citizen or as a dirty, filthy porn-looker-atter.
bloomington-lib
(946 posts)truthisfreedom
(23,148 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)And anyone who thinks those people won't face consequences is a bigger fool than I can imagine. Unless a majority of users decide they don't want the filter.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Everyone has said they would like access to online pornography, scuppering David Camerons plans to make such content available only to people who say they want it.
The Prime Minister is expected to outline plans today for online pornography to be made available only in homes that opt-in to such content, seemingly unaware that everyone has already done so.
Internet user Simon Williams told us, The moment I hear there was a plan for opt-in, I put my hand in the air. Not that one, that one was busy.
If the government is somehow under the impression that this nations secret perverts will too ashamed to opt-in to get access to their porn fix, then they are sorely mistaken.
http://newsthump.com/2013/07/22/cameron-porn-block-plans-in-disarray-as-100-of-homes-opt-in/
A spokesperson explained, The mistake we have made is underestimating how thoroughly depraved the general public is, and how tedious masturbation can actually be without access to a myriad of online filth.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)Lenomsky
(340 posts)but think I'd opt out on the basis kids do get access unwittingly or for teenagers by design.
My sister recently told me her 10 y/o was getting explicit redirects and pop-ups so I'll reformat and reinstall his laptop OS soon.
I don't feel this is censorship but freedom to choose and hope the ISP design a decent filter and not fuck it up.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Time for him to file for unemployment!
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)question everything
(47,485 posts)wish they could do the same.
On second thought: they wish they could force others to do the same, while they are free to do as they please, again.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)What's he hiding?
Those who shout the loudest tend to be those with the most to run from.
Wolf Frankula
(3,601 posts)More right wing hypocrisy.
Wolf
daleo
(21,317 posts)It's both pointless and Puritan. It's just to appeal to the conservative base, many of whom are undoubtedly aficionados of the genre. So even there, he might well lose votes. It seems like the sort of thing desperate politicians do - his popularity must be "going down".
Akoto
(4,266 posts)Bosonic
(3,746 posts)tjwmason
(14,819 posts)Prudish ranting on half of the screen.
Titillation on the other half.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Just don't think about how we were spying on you.
Dash87
(3,220 posts)what pedophiles network is going to purposely allow themselves to be found so easily through key words like "child sex?" That would be like a crack house posting a billboard outside saying "free crack!"
Secondly, Google is already on this. Google is secretly building a database of illegal stuff and is going to censor those results (as they should anyways, obviously).
Finally, I'm not sure that violent porn should be outlawed. Yeah it's weird and creepy, but it's not like anyone actually got hurt in them if they're simulated.
This seems like more of a RW censor attempt than doing anything productive.