Any thoughts on the porn ban?

[Lula1998]

Hate the Tories but I think this is the one thing they've done that I agree with. I know kids can get round it with VPNs etc, but some of the younger ones won't. Porn is a cancer imo.

BorneBack

See now I read it that a visitor to the site would end up on a landing page that has no adult content, only after age verification would the site let you go past the landing page.

But.. and I'm not sure if this has been mentioned.. but the government is basing all of this on a report by NSPCC... That report by he NSPCC was based on the results of an online survey about children. It did nothing to ensure children were answering, it only asked 11 questions and it paid the responders.

So you know all the times people on MN have been short a few quid and someone days, "have you tried some surveys?", They're the people that have answered the survey, not kids, they have answered the short survey to earm 20p or whatever.

It makes the whole dang thing based in shit evidence procured by wankers. #thewholedangthingisbasedonshitevidenceprocuredbywankers

BorneBackCeaselesslyIntoThePas the age verification is being done by the industry. One of the systems will AgeID which was developed by MindGeek who also own some of the biggest porn sites.

The ones who use tech as a free babysitter are not going to be so responsible, either through fecklessness and/or the stresses of their lives.

That's a good point! There are those people, and I don't know what can be done about them - maybe a move to it being socially unacceptable, in the same way it would be to get children to sleep by giving them gin?

Saying that, I also know of parents who don't have the 'excuse' of stress who have a very naive approach towards their childrens' tech use too.

My fear is it will seep onto ‘maintstream’ sites like YouTube and be stumbled upon by more children that would have sought it out.

I don’t like being dictated to as an adult. I don’t trust this government, they have no idea what they are doing about anything.

Much as I would like tighter controls on access, and for children to be completely unable to access anything pornographic, I fear this is going to just be a massive fuck up that will do more harm than good.

But.. and I'm not sure if this has been mentioned.. but the government is basing all of this on a report by NSPCC... That report by he NSPCC was based on the results of an online survey about children. It did nothing to ensure children were answering, it only asked 11 questions and it paid the responders.

I remember there was a thread on MN when the report was released, but I had no idea it was based on such flimsy evidence. It's actually quite disgraceful that such a botched piece of legislation could be passed based on what may or may not be genuine responses. it really is a knee-jerk attempt by the government to look as though they are doing something, when in reality they are doing worse than nothing.

SaskiaRembrandt

The original report the NSPCC used was done by OnePoll.
To register on OnePoll you have to be 18+ I believe.
The report the NSPCC used started by asking the registered user to get a child to answer...

This ridiculous ban is not based on any accurate information at all, it's based on knee jerk reactions to over inflated headlines based on adults entering any info to an online survey to earn 20p

But, that doesn't change the fact children shouldn't be watching porn. The parents should be better educated to get parental controls in place and to teach the children that porn isn't real sex etc.

MonkeyToesOfDoom

Why am I not even surprised at the "evidence base" for this? Why am I not even surprised the government is this credulous? Why am I not even surprised NSPCC is involved?

Actual, proper, evidenced and skilled child protection has all but disappeared in this country.

MonkeyToesOfDoom That is shocking! Both the actions of the NSPCC in carrying out such a dreadful piece of 'research' and the government in accepting it.

There is clearly a problem, but it's one that, for some reason, many people seem reluctant to accept the only workable solution - that parents need to restrict and monitor internet usage and talk to their children. Instead we get this constant instance that there is a simple technical solution despite technical people saying there isn't.

On another thread about this, a poster likened it to someone constantly asking for a unicorn despite being told they don't exist - it really is like that.

Actual, proper, evidenced and skilled child protection has all but disappeared in this country.

I think it's indicative of a much wider problem - you know, that whole thing about no one wanting to listen to experts which has led to a government making policy based on what makes their target voters happy rather than what is actually evidenced and effective.

We need less elitist old white male career politicians in government and more young people of every persuasion, colour, gender and background.
We might get a government that vaguely understands the modern world then.

I think it's indicative of a much wider problem - you know, that whole thing about no one wanting to listen to experts which has led to a government making policy based on what makes their target voters happy rather than what is actually evidenced and effective.

Indeed. Although I'd add...

making policy based on what makes their target voters happy, doesn't cost much and what it does cost is directed towards unprincipled businesses...

!!

It's a poorly thought out idea which will do little to stop the proliferation of "bad" porn but will result hurt small/ "good" porn makers
And probably loads of other content as unexpected consequence

Can we back up a second, did someone say the government are working with the company that owns multiple porn sites?

There may be problems with this law, but at least it's something. To be honest, I'm rather shocked that so many people on a feminist forum would oppose regulatory oversight of the sex industry so strongly and place full responsibility on the parents. In a society this networked, parents are no longer able to exercise that level of control. These companies are no better than prostitution rackets (what else is porn than filmed prostitution?) doing untold damage - to women, to men, to society. They need to be confronted and reigned in.

Arguing that 'regulation of the internet doesn't work, it's the responsibility of parents to protect and educate their children' is no different from saying, 'regulating banks doesn't work, it's up to customers to make prudent decisions.' In other words, it's a 'let the market rule' position worthy of Margaret Thatcher, but dressed up in some pseudo-liberal crap about free speech - as though society should uphold the right of a smut baron to peddle misogynist vileness like, 'teen whore gets fucked up the ass', all freely available to children.

Imagine, pre-internet, someone arguing that top shelf mags should be on the bottom shelf and kids should be allowed to buy them. That would have been considered an insane viewpoint, but when it comes to the web the equivalent argument becomes credible. Why?

Here is something that I think could be done, a restriction which could be put in place:

We could pass a law which makes it illegal for hotels etc to have porn on their tv screens. Pay per view or whatever it's called. Small step. Wouldn't solve the whole problem. Would send out a message though? That we as a society regard porn as something awful? Making it available in hotels just normalises it. (Even more)

I bet we could come up with more suggestions.

Like OP I too regard porn as a cancer.

GoodyMog

Yep, MindGeek, maker of AgeID also owns, at last count, 24 of the top porn sites on the net.
But if you look on MindGeek website they're not mentioned, it's only when you really look into them you find that info.

But the internet does not work like those porn mags on the top shelf!! Essentially what is happening with this ban is they are putting playboy on the top shelf of the newsagents and then just scattering loads of bestiality and child porn photos around in the bushes for kids to find instead!!

You cant turn back time. You cant put your fingers in your ears. This ban is a sticky plaster, a political show pony with absolutely no real value at all...
Porn is already filtered on the internet if you use parental blockers. And you would use parental blockers and supervision if you were a parent that gave a shit... and if you arent a parent that gives a shit you are not going to notice when your child turns to encrypted messaging sites or Tor to download porn with absolutely no blockers on it not even Google levels of filtering!! And that is what the kids of those parents will be inclined to do when they cannot access the porn as they could previously.
Its putting them more at risk.

You cannot compare it to something like banking at all.

What you could compare it to is making prostitution illegal. Again a political show pony that actually puts women at more risk of harm than it protects them.
The war on drugs is another... ridiculous vote winning rhetoric that actually does more harm than good because it pretends that you can 'ban' things you dont like and that alone will protect everyone.

Imagine, pre-internet, someone arguing that top shelf mags should be on the bottom shelf and kids should be allowed to buy them. That would have been considered an insane viewpoint, but when it comes to the web the equivalent argument becomes credible. Why?

Actually, use your pre internet imaginings and think of it this way.
A 14 year old can't buy Playboy that features nude women, but he can get a hardcore full penetration magazine from that bloke behind the gym.
That's what this block will do.

Read the information.
It will insist all "commercial" websites have this block.. commercial being the businesses that.profit from porn. It won't have to be on niche sites that don't work to make profit.
It's pushing users away from restricted and into unrestricted and niche pornography.

Teens are going to wank, they're going to find stuff to wank over.. if they can't access sites with moderated and controlled content like PornHub they're going to go to darker corners of the web, they won't just give up and pull their puddings over the lingerie section of the Next catalogue.

All it does it make some mums feel like their morality is being acknowledged in order to win their votes. It also collects very sensitive data that is worth a lot of money.
And these mums its pandering to are the ones who probably monitor their childs internet usage as much as possible anyway.... so who is it actually helping?
Not the truly vulnerable kids who's parents dont give a shit because they are now being placed in even dodgier situations.

@MonkeyToesOfDoom exactly. It makes things much worse.

A 14 year old can't buy Playboy that features nude women, but he can get a hardcore full penetration magazine from that bloke behind the gym.

And therefore....14 year olds should be sold porn mags because they're only going to get hold of them anyway? Should this principle apply to alcohol and tobacco products too?

The only way to stop children accessing porn is not to give them the devices in the first place.
Of course they will still be able to access it, and it changes nothing.

@Lula1998 no they shouldnt be sold porn mags at all no one is saying that! They are saying that how things are currently is actually a better set up than the one that is being rolled out.... for all the reasons people have listed!!
It's not really comparable to a newsagents at all tbh... but you tried to make that comparison!

This not only won't work, it will make things worse.

I talk to my daughter and I talked to her about porn.