Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Why you shouldn't support legislation blocking internet porn

899 replies

Andrewjh · 07/05/2012 00:21

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.

OP posts:
DioneTheDiabolist · 14/05/2012 00:12

Empusa, that is exactly what does happen. Some shops sell fags and booze to kids. These shops run this risk knowing that they can be prosecuted and are prosecuted.

ravenAK · 14/05/2012 00:14

Ah, the 'taking control of how the entire planet's porn providers choose to structure their websites, both the current ones, wherever in the world they may be, & the thousands that sprout up every month' switch - that's the button next to the one that turns the rain off, yes?

Sorry. The ISP filter proposal was quite a bit less ridiculous, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

NannyPlumIsMyMum · 14/05/2012 00:16

Unless you have named changed for this ... And I can't think why you would..
I'm very suspicious of you Andrew because to be quite frank - you have never posted any thing on this before this.

So you obviously have vested interest in which case I'm not really interested .

NannyPlumIsMyMum · 14/05/2012 00:16

I mean you have never posted anything on this site before.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 00:17

I am looking for hope and not giving up on our children, and open-minded to the possibilty of technology improving.

I base this hope on the fact I care about children and Im afraid I am not a "well thats my lot, so I roll over " type person. You see impossible, I see possibilty. Thats how we differ.

I base my hope of technological advancement through evidence, based on the rapid rate technology grows everyday.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 00:18

raven

i can just imagine you as the type of person who stand around laughing at The wright brothers

DioneTheDiabolist · 14/05/2012 00:20

I too am suspicious Nanny.

I can't see what any proper adult oriented porn site would have to lose in this legislation.

NannyPlumIsMyMum · 14/05/2012 00:22

Glad I'm not the only one Dione.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 00:23

Nanny I didnt realise that either... Hmm...

Empusa · 14/05/2012 00:39

Even if the OP is a bridge dweller it doesn't negate the arguments put forward in both the OP and subsequent posts.

"I can't see what any proper adult oriented porn site would have to lose in this legislation."

They wouldn't have anything to lose.

ravenAK · 14/05/2012 00:44

I think you'll find that the analogy to the Wright brothers is that they were doing new stuff. That's always going to be where the winners in the internet arms race are - not trying to make bits of it go away because you (& I) don't like them).

I'd say your stance is a bit more Worthing Birdman.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 01:07

There are two types of people in this world. Those that try and have vision, and want change and things to improve.

Then there are the ravens of the world

Empusa · 14/05/2012 01:08

starwisher Sitting around and saying "someone should do something" doesn't make you a visionary.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 01:12

What do you think visonaries are? people who see new ideas that do not exist and see the possibilty. it doesnt mean I personally have the skill to develp the idea to fruitation but I can envisage it.

Some people can only see what is in front of them.

There will always be people ready to point out why they will fail, and mock and laugh.

OldLadyKnowsNothing · 14/05/2012 01:37

I can imagine a world with no war, death or famine. Doesn't mean it'll happen any time soon.

ravenAK · 14/05/2012 01:37

Starwisher - I think some of your opinions are idiotic, but I've not called you an idiot. At all. You might want to think about that, next time argument fails you & you find yourself getting arsey about it.

Meanwhile, this thread has highlighted, for me, that some parents are astonishingly ill-informed about how the internet works, & practical measures they can actually take to protect their children. It's been an eye-opener!

I'll pass the sensible stuff suggested here on to our next Governors Meeting, & stick it on the agenda for next year 7 tutor meeting. One useful thing I can do is to raise awareness about how important it is to get info about effective home filtering out. It's certainly something to think about for our tutor programme next year.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 01:44

raven just because you cannot grasp an argument does not mean the argument has failed, it means your understanding has.

ravenAK · 14/05/2012 01:53

Glad you clarified that, I might've gone to bed thinking you were talking total bobbins, & then where would we be?

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 01:54

Glad to have helped.

Empusa · 14/05/2012 04:07

Tbh starwisher much as I'd love to sit and discuss an imaginary future technology with you, it doesn't actually address the topic of this thread. Which is about what is currently available and what is potentially available. Your utopian tech doesn't fall into either category (unless you have some advanced tech know how that you've failed to mention). This doesn't mean I am against your imaginary technology, I just don't feel it's relevant, and trying to insinuate I am somehow in favour of children viewing porn (or that I am a bad parent) because I'm not oozing enthusiasm for it, is plain ridiculous.

Now if you have any ideas for plausible ways to protect children from viewing porn right now, or even in the immediate future, then that would be fascinating!

Because so far I've put forward the methods which are currently available, discussed why some of the proposed measures are flawed, and been told by you that I am not doing enough.

While you have put forward no alternative or complementary methods, and instead have talked about technology which does not exist and may never exist, with absolutely no information on how it could come to exist. Just that it should. Somehow you seem to feel your contribution is more helpful to parents? But you've yet to explain yet how your not-yet-in-existence-or-even-close technology will help parents now.

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 04:56

Firstly if we discussing potential ideas, that that would fall into the category.

I have never insuated you want your child to view porn, I have explained to you how naive you are to think your methods (which are juststandard ones everyone uses) are enough. Your propsol to always watch your child online is utterly unrealistic. Nobody could stick to that, and futhermore as your kids reach teenhood I think it would be an infringment on their privacy to monitor everything they do. They are entitled to their own space.

You are not doing enough, I am not doing enough, nobody is doing enough becuase the resources simply do not exist.

I dont think my propsol to enforce websites to put measures into place to prevent under 18s is exactly the wacky idea you seem to believe. When I was a teenager this is what you had to do to access porn. It already used to be like this you know once upon a time.

MarieFromStMoritz · 14/05/2012 05:50

Empusa, have you never heard of SmartFilter?

Starwisher · 14/05/2012 06:09

ensuring age verfication of whoever is viewing the site is not a even an outrageous idea, Im not sure why its been met with such hysteria by some.

Tried and tested technology so far worlwide includes Credit and debit cards, EID cards, semantic anaylsis, social security numbers, biometrics and of course self certification.

None of the methods so far have been the silver bullet. The only one we have right now is self certification, which of course is pathetic.

There is a market out there for age verfication. if even the experts out there dont have the solution then surely you cant expect someone on mumsnet to have the answer.

Authorities globally will be working alongside industry to find a solution.

Animation · 14/05/2012 06:17

"I dont think my propsol to enforce websites to put measures into place to prevent under 18s is exactly the wacky idea you seem to believe."

Agrre - it makes sense to me.

Cannot understand why a few posters are coming on here just to say - it can't be done. it can't be done, it can't be done.... Confused

...it can't be done it can't be done it can't be done it can't be done...

Confused
Animation · 14/05/2012 06:22

"There is a market out there for age verfication. if even the experts out there dont have the solution then surely you cant expect someone on mumsnet to have the answer."

Exactly!