Why you shouldn't support legislation blocking internet porn

[Andrewjh]

Ed Vaizey and Claire Perry and a number of other politicians are trying to force ISPs to block adult content under the pretence of "think of the children", however this will have the opposite effect and could lead to children being exposed to far greater problems.

• Children these days are very tech savvy, especially with regard to the internet. And they need to be - the UK is the largest internet economy in the world. To succeed in the UK in the future, you'll need to know your way around a computer and around the internet from an early age.

• What happens when ISPs block sites is something called the Streisand Effect. Basically by banning it, they generate a huge amount of publicity and support for the sites. The Pirate Bay site last week got blocked in the UK, and it received traffic increases of 12 million users downloading millions of pounds worth of software, music, films and games. Blocking something increases its internet traffic, its exposure, and suddenly 30 times more people know about it than did before.

• What also happens when you block these sites is a huge amount of internet users figure out free and easy ways around the blocks. ISP's don't have the resources to stop this, and in most cases, it is impossible for them to do so. anyway. The Pirate Bay blocks can be got around within 20 seconds, and that is just googling "how do I get around pirate bay blocks".

• Many of the methods employed by users to get around the Pirate Bay blocks so they can illegally download files will also be posted as guides to get around porn blocks. These are accessible through any search engine (google, bing, yahoo).

• The problem is that tech savvy children (it only takes one to find out how from the internet or an older brother, then tell his friends, who tell their friends etc) can easily find out how to get around it. I mean it is as easily as it is to look up something for their homework, if not easier.

• The other more dangerous issue is that whilst once they've gone through those guides, they can easily find links to far darker sites which host horrific viruses, hackers, as well as references to drugs, drink and other adult content. They can also find links to anonymous chatrooms where they could meet anyone without you knowing.

• This is the danger that opt in and blocking poses. They will give you a sense of security when there is none.

• This is also based on the assumption that the block actually blocks all porn. They rarely ever do, and sites posing as sex education sites which don't get blocked get through with adult content. So you'll be under the illusion that the internet is safely blocked when it isn't.

Think of it like this. Imagine the internet is a cliff, and we are having a picnic at the top of the cliff. It's a mostly beautiful view, but if you let your guard down, you could fall off. You wouldn't let your child play near the edge. Installing the opt in system is like putting a strong looking but flimsy fence in place. You could be fooled in to thinking it was safe but left to their own devices your child, could easily fall through. We can't put a brick wall there otherwise it spoils the natural beauty of the view (the educational benefits of the internet).

So what to do? Firstly don't support legislation calling for blocks. It doesn't work, its been shown not to work in the past as well as more recently. Children can easily find a way around it, and in doing so find a far darker side of the internet.

Secondly: If you are concerned, use censoring software on your computer, but don't be content with just that. Use Browser tracking software like this - www.any-activity-monitor.com/free-browser-history-recorder.html so you can accurate tell what your child has been viewing, even if they delete it off the browser. There are also many simple, free and easy tutorials written online on how to better protect your computer and your child.

Thirdly: Take some time to talk to your child about internet use. It can be an amazing tool but it can be dangerous. They need to know that right and wrong, safe and risky, they all still apply online (something easy to forget I assure you). They'll avoid things if they know its wrong. They will be curious about things if its only blocked.

Lastly, don't be fooled by people using the "think of the children" line. It's an alarmist appeal to emotion. There is very little danger so long as you use your common sense and only allow a child a sensible amount of time on the internet. As a politics student, I have to question whether this has been saved up till now to gain support for the government after an miserable turn in recent polls.

Thanks very much for reading, I hope you'll consider your position.

"So you don't care what they do, or if their actions are effective, so long as they are seen to be doing something (anything)?"

I want them to do their job - do what they're paid to do, and get the experts in to help them sort out this ridiculous situation whereby children can so very easily view porn.

This notion that we live in a free world which will suddenly become an oppressive 1984 style regime if we try to restrict internet porn is also ridiculous.

Let's fight for the right for the porn hounds to continue their multi billion dollar business of sexually exploiting women - that way lies true freedom for all. Right on!

(Larry Flint would be loving this.)

Beachcomber - well said!

I do not agre it is ridiculous. Why shoudl we have our internet access capped by the state? If people choose to have children (and plenty do not) they should control their own chidlren,. We do not want this nanny state interfering. It is a huge curtailment of personal freedom and would be an appalling precedent to be established. Loads of mothers are against it. It will not buy Cameron more votes.

"Loads of mothers are against it"

I don't believe that.

I'm no fan of porn.

I totally agree with Xenia. I also think it's not only an appalling precedent but a dangerous one. I don't want to live in a big brother society.

Also agree with the OP that it's a desperate attempt to win back voters, women and mothers in particular.

Um folks your internet access is already controlled, why are you protesting against this particular type of control?

Would you protest against controls on the diffusion of racist hate speech and violence, or do you think Orwellian oppression lies that way too ?

How about films containing homophobic language and violence? Would the free world come to an end if they were considered not cricket?

First they came for the porn hounds....
Then they applied controls on images such as ass to mouth and double anal...
Then they went after bukake...
Then they made me opt in in order to wank to them...

It just doesn't have quite the same ring to it does it?

Beachcomber: have you actually read the thread about why this step doesn't offer good protection ? Would you be happy with the government handing out condoms known to be defective because "some protection is better than none"? Or would you insist on getting your own, vastly higher quality ones for you and your DCs and, even more importantly, educating them about the risks and keeping good communication with them so you know what they're up to and have some idea of when/how to step in?

And the porn billboard example is an interesting one. For the currently proposed measure is akin to banning only the billboard ads registered to known porn purveyors (regardless of whether the ad is pornographic) but leaving up pornographic images because the advertiser isn't a registered porn purveyor.

Parents who want an ISP filter can have one (available on Talk Talk, and possibly others). Parents who actually want protection for their children can use filters (such as the one Niceguy2 linked), keep computers in 'public' parts of their house, educate themselves and their children on the risks.

And also educate their children about porn, of course.

get the experts in to help them sort out this ridiculous situation

That's one of my points. Virtually all IT people, the 'experts' you say will be united in saying this plan won't work unless it's part of a wider strategy of which there is none.

The only ones who are saying this is a good idea will be the very people whom will be making millions selling the technology. They'll naturally have all sorts of caveats insulating them from the fact the technology won't work.

It sounds more to me like you don't like the answer, don't want to hear the answer so you'll just keep your head in the sand until someone gives you the answer you want to hear. You have every right to do that but it makes for very poor government policy.

Yes I have read the the thread. Yes I understand that the system proposed is flawed.

I don't think it is impossible to find a solution - where there is a will there is a way. I don't see what is the problem with creating a system where pornographic material has to be declared as such by those (professional or otherwise) who wish to publish it in the public domain. It would then be perfectly easy to keep such material on an opt in register.

I suspect it is the will that is lacking though especially when I read nonsense about the world becoming a dark and oppressive place because pornographic film access is restricted.

Niceguy - I'm not convinced that nothing can be done. Not sure why you're so negative on this.

I would have thought they'd need more more than IT experts.

How is my head in the sand?

Beachcomber, you are arguing for a different thing and if there was such a proposed system which worked then yes, it should be considered.

As a parent of three kids I obviously am keen to protect them too. And I'm glad you realise the current proposals are deeply flawed to the point it's unworkable.

If/when the government come back with a workable solution then I'd wholeheartedly support it. Until then I will continue to oppose it and explain to anyone whom will listen why.

Animation, I'm not saying nothing can be done. I'm saying that the current plans are rubbish and the wrong solution because they won't work. There's a big difference.

I've suggested ways which I believe are better, easily done now using common sense, tools which are readily available now and without the need for a massively expensive, arbitary and controlling filtering system which ultimately won't work.

I'm not demanding 100% accuracy, nor that I have some inherent right to view porn. I'm just saying ISP level blocking is a BAD solution.

I'd be quite interested to know how a porn register would work, as it would have to be global to be effective and would rely on self-identification for compliance.

Also, because the sheer size and agility of the Internet means the received opinion is that policing content is impossible, I be interested to know how it can be done (and by whom), as I have never heard a convincing account of a workable scenario.

"If/when the government come back with a workable solution then I'd wholeheartedly support it. Until then I will continue to oppose it and explain to anyone whom will listen why."

Maybe the workable solution - will in fact take some time through trial and error - until they crack it. The internet is a relatively new phenomenon and maybe the government don't have all the solutions at hand yet - how to block porn from kids, - but I like the fact they're they're giving it a damned good go.

BC, we will just have to agree to differ. I think people whose interests are that way inclined are perfectly entitled to look at images of that kind. Just as someone can look at pro hunting or anti hunting or even information about chidlren (which might be repellant to those who hate children). It is freedom we are after and this measure woudl be the antithesis of that. You are assuming we are all like you. I delight in living on a planet where people differ and we can happily co-exist with others who have different views from our own.

This notion that There Is Nothing To Be Done and we must all put up with porn all over the internet is ridiculous.

Of course it is, it's a complete straw man!

Nobody is arguing that There Is Nothing To Be Done.

Here is What Can Be Done:

1. install one of the free, effective, properly configurable net filters which are already available. K9 has already been linked to. There are others.

2. supervise your DC.

3. educate your DC

4. bring in a proper education programme for children AND parents. Do it through schools, do it regularly. Help parents install and maintain the necessary filters.

5. If you really want a ISP level filter, sign up with Talk Talk. Nobody who is posting in favour of this proposal seems to have done that.

I hate porn. I'd love there to be a big shiny effective Porn-Be-Gone button. This isn't it.

To be honest I don't even want to see porn images - just like that - if I google "PORN" - how come I can??

....surely there should be some censureship process to go through before you see this shit!

"censorship"

I can easily sort out my own computers- it is the DCs where parents don't supervise that bother me.

I do supervise my children and I do have a filter.

My children are too young to have porn explained to them. They are also too young to use a computer unsupervised - we only realy use it with them for looking up school project stuff and listening to music.

But they to go other people's houses and they will do so more and more as they get older plus they have friends who have internet access on mobile phones.

Don't worry Xenia - I'm not suggesting that porn should be taken away from its consumers, I'm just suggesting that they consume responsibly (radical notion I know!).

The one thing I definitly want banned is these "tube" sites. I wont mention any by name as last time I did that a poster went balastic at me, but Im sure most of us know what I am referring too.

All porn websites should be sign-up and prove your over 18 only, like in the old days. Its shocking how easy it is to see porn within seconds by anyone, of any age. Sign up to individual sites only, I say.

By the way it seems ridiculous people keep saying parents must always supervise internet access all the time, its only themselves they have to blame etc

Its impossible. For a start they could see things at friends houses, they could use their mobile phones or ipads.

Im sure plently would work out ways around parental controls anyway.

Unless you plan to spend your life looking over your kids shoulder everytime they go near the internet, its just a ridiculous notion.