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.

pm me if you want to

Have done :)

I don't see how anyone can argue against making it tougher for children to access porn. Adults will still be able to freely access it if they please. There is no erosion of anyone's rights.

YES Chandellina!

But why would he, if you've got sensible & effective filters in place?

If we're talking 10 year olds rather than teens now, honestly, the solution is available to you now - download a filter which, unlike the one we'll get if this goes through, works.

My ds is nearly 8. He's quite capable of googling 'UK filter bypass' if there was such a filter in place, & following instructions from there. In the highly unlikely event of such a silly law being passed, I suspect in a few years' time he'd be one of the geeky kids telling everyone else how to circumvent it.

For now, I just make sure I monitor his internet use. Carefully.

Honestly, I'm no keener than you are to expose our dc to pornograpy.

If your no keener then why just make it that little bit harder to access it? That really is all I am saying.

I do not want to have monitor my dd internet use when she is older, as I believe she should be entitled to privacy.

He wouldn't be able to follow instructions- he would need a password. I also can't see why he wouldn't need a credit card. If a lot of money was offered to solve the problem someone would find an effective way of blocking it for under 18yr olds.

Raven, most kids are just not going to bother. Particularly if restrictions mean they are exposed to less porn than at the present and it becomes less normalised.

It's not going away but I'd far rather return it to a bit of a risqué status for children rather than having them view hardcore images as a standard part if their daily or weekly media.

And it's ludicrous to say parents are only responsible for their own children and no one else's. It is my business as a parent if my child is being harmed by others.

My last comment referred to something Xenia said

Most kids aren't going to bother spending hours looking for a work-around, true, Chandellina.

The point is - they don't need to. Someone will come up with one & it will be quickly disseminated, just as is done in schools with net filtering now. Most kids can, & will, follow a web link & a few simple instructions.

Starwisher - because I don't believe it will make it harder to access. I believe it'll make it easier, because parents (not you or me, hopefully) will complacently trust in an unworkable 'filter' rather than effectively teaching their dc about t'internet & monitoring their use thereof.

It can't work. The nature of the internet is such that it's about as workable as deciding you don't want your dc to be affected by the dustcloud from a volcano on the other side of the world, & so it'd be a great idea to put a giant piece of clingfilm over the whole of the UK.

It can't be done, for technical reasons, & anyone who tells you it can is either woefully misinformed or has their own agenda for misleading you.

exoticfruits: 'He wouldn't be able to follow instructions- he would need a password. I also can't see why he wouldn't need a credit card.'

Because you'd have to get every single porn provider in the world to agree to make their sites password/credit card only.

You don't have any jurisdiction to do that & nor does the UK government.

If a filter is unworkable, then how come a home filter on the PC works?
If kids can get round ISP filters etc. then surely they can also get round home filters too? So ISP filters etc must be at least as good if not better than home filters.

I support blocking at ISP level.

Because a home filter filters what you, as the person i/c of your family's internet access, want it to filter. You can set it to various levels or customise it if there's particular sites you want to allow or disallow.

I could quite happily decide that no-one in my family wants or needs to look at , or just allow half a dozen educational sites, say, or set it up to text me if anyone is up to anything I disapprove of. It'll also log every keystroke made, if I want it to, record chat conversations & email, & video everything which takes place on the monitor.

(Actually I agree with Starwisher that privacy then can become an issue).

Try doing that for 60 million people.

Having porn on the internet as an opt-in will communicate that it is not suitable for young people to see. That will reassert its status as an adult minority interest hopefully.

I hope this will help to halt the sexualisation of children that has been stealthily evolving over the last decade. I hope it will help to re-establish a perception that pornography is not normal and healthy but see it for what it is - a multi-million exploitation of (mostly women) who are vulnerable, and which dehumanises and desensitises people generally.

I hope it will help children to grow up with their attitudes to sex formed by personal positive experiences rather than the warped perceptions of porn sex.

But browsers have default security settings. Why can't the default security settings be what would be the settings of a home filter?

Starwisher - 15:42 - "You would have to make it compulsory under law to restrict material to over 18s only with sign up sites."

Come on, who are you going to get to force websites to have "members only" sites ?

The internet is GLOBAL and under no single authority to control (even if the USA gets its fingers into a lot of sites because of US firms either owning many hosting services or being involved in administering domain names). Creating a law here will only force conformity among UK-based businesses (and possibly those using .co.uk for the domain name), but it's unworkable, and has as much chance as Animation's wish to ban all porn on the web...

ICANN only recently approved .xxx domain names after about 10 years since it was first proposed as an option. Why didn't it come into existence before? It was the US Government with the Republicans in control who were objecting, I think (if memory serves about the .xxx being rejected again and again).

Unfortunately, like it or not, porn was intertwined with the internet as we now know it. Which group pushed for online credit/debit card processing? Which pushed (and were willing to pay) for higher speed links, big data centres, etc.

You can find articles explaining how (just like VHS VCRs in the 70s/80s) porn led demand for certain developments, such as compression of graphics, video streaming, online charging, and so on. Also, detrimentally, spam, pop-up ads, etc, before you even argue any moral case.

Well, apart from the practicalities, because your home filter & mine might be different things.

I might decide not to expose my innocent babes to the Daily Mail f'rinstance.

Starwisher you wrote this...I do not want to have monitor my dd internet use when she is older, as I believe she should be entitled to privacy.

But you actually want the government to do the monitoring for you and more so because you seem to think you know what is best for all children.

Could you ask the question earlier of what part of nudity you are against. Ar you against your children seeing other kids (4-) ) running naked on the beach or topless woman etc etc.

i would quite like to have a fuller understanding of your position so i do not have a mis-conception.

Well the Daily Mail is campaigning against porn being so easily accessible.

If certain countries can ban the entire internet networkguy then regulating porn sites is small fry.

If the goverment can already pull down sites about making home made bombs, the power is there.

Yes I want the goverment to have policies that mean porn is not accessable to CHILDREN

Yes, I am 100% sure that is best for all children, oddly enough.

What naked children have got to do with porn I dont know, very strange. Nudity and porn are not the same.

Why are you bringing naked infants into this?

They can easily ban the internet because you just don't allow an isp to connect in country.Doesn't stop anyone with a modem direct dialling another country for net access. Which is how When I was 12 with a CBM 64 and 9600 baud modem I was calling the USA for the 3 months of summer to look at Bulletin Boards before the parents got the bill and cut of the line. if my parents had not given me the phone line or left me alone I'd not have been able to do anything.

How does the government go about 'pulling down' a site based in Holland or Indonesia?

If you want a site removed, you contact the hosting provider, who will generally be co-operative if they're reputable & can see that the site is likely to get them into bother for hosting it.

It doesn't mean they have to comply, or that the content hasn't been cached & won't be made available again via another host.

Mainstream porn wouldn't be removed unless the host was in a country that had also decided it didn't want porn to be freely available. Otherwise, why on earth would they remove profitable content that was perfectly legal in their own country?

So your parents must have been really crap for you to have got away with that. Why didnt they constantly monitor you? What on earth where they doing when you were up to this for three whole months?