Freedom Of Expression, Decency, Censorship And The Internet

[Dubai]

On the one hand, I abhor people who think they know better telling me what I can and cannot do / see / read / hear etc.

When gumments decide what can and cannot be seen on t'net, I immediately put my TFH on and think they have something to hide.

On the other hand... I have kids. They are forever hearing about the internet at school, they know what google is and I have to give "demos" or find stuff for school projects with them leaning over my shoulder. Some of the stuff that gets pulled up from an innocent search is astonishing, and I dread that my eldest will read it!

Then there's porn.... the most degrading stuff imaginable is immediately available, in your face, for free. Any kid can view it straight away.

I don't know what the UK is like now, but they used to have quite strict porn laws. Soft porn mags were put on top shelves, with any "bits" on the front page covered.....!! They had a 9 pm watershed so kids weren't exposed to "adult" themes.....Now look at the net!

As far as I'm concerned, what two (or more) consenting adults get up to in private is none of my business.... but try it in front of my kids and you'll lose your knacks!

Which brings me, at long last, to my point.... do you think that "adult" sites need to have some sort of access controls? Should there be a sort of ratings system for sites, with access somehow limited, like the cinema?

As a parent, I'm mortified by the stuff out there.... I know you can't protect kids forever, but I think a 6 year old should not be watching bukkake vids!!

Any thoughts?

[Dubai]

The problem is it's impossible to police the internet. All you can have is the current honour system where they ask you if you are above a certain age (and I don't know that from the dodgy sites - you get on iplayer). Unless every person on the planet was put in a database and had an internet account number and password then it would be impossible to ascertain who was actually accessing a particular site. The only advice I can offer you is to turn the parental controls up to the max and enable safe searches in google.

Well, it's not impossible. China, the Muslim countries, Australia.... they all do it to some degree.... which is the gumment blocking sites they don't like, not just porn, period!

There is no honour system on the free porn sites... it's there, in your face (er hum, you know what I mean!!).

Thanks for the advice.... I have used parental control but it is awkward in that you have to add every single site that's allowed.... I wish someone would come up with a ratings system for websites, and you could direct your browser accordingly....

[Kingding]

Well, it's not impossible. China, the Muslim countries, Australia.... they all do it to some degree.... which is the gumment blocking sites they don't like, not just porn, period!

There is no honour system on the free porn sites... it's there, in your face (er hum, you know what I mean!!).

Thanks for the advice.... I have used parental control but it is awkward in that you have to add every single site that's allowed.... I wish someone would come up with a ratings system for websites, and you could direct your browser accordingly....

I agree with what you are saying but as Mmm beer said it's almost impossible to police though I think it could be done as you said. I have a friend who is a teacher and he said that some of the stuff that they catch kids watching in class etc. on mobiles and iPods downloaded from the net is horrific. Not just porn but extreme violence, beheadings etc.

Call me archaic but it needs to be regulated, sites like rotten.com have no place in a civilised society and anyone who peruses stuff like that for giggles wants to have a serious word with themselves. Kids having unrestricted access to that sort of material worries me as much as the porn does. I think I'd be very Victorian Dad about the whole internet thing, no computer in their room or where I couldn't see it, no access to social networking sites until they are at least 16...basically I'd be keeping a very beady eye on what went on. You wouldn't be able to stop everything but I'd do my utmost not to empower it.

It's a bit sad when you think about it, society has been handed the most powerful informative tool in history and has, up until now, mostly succeeded in filling it with absolute shit.

[porca misèria]

Well, it's not impossible. China, the Muslim countries, Australia.... they all do it to some degree.... which is the gumment blocking sites they don't like, not just porn, period!

There is no honour system on the free porn sites... it's there, in your face (er hum, you know what I mean!!).

Thanks for the advice.... I have used parental control but it is awkward in that you have to add every single site that's allowed.... I wish someone would come up with a ratings system for websites, and you could direct your browser accordingly....

I've been on't net from home since 1987[1], and the worst porn I've seen is some moments of levity on this very forum (HPC) when silly pics get posted. It's absolutely not "in your face" unless you seek it out.

And don't kid yourself China-style censorship doesn't happen here. Google "Internet watch foundation", or see this article.

[1] yes, that's eightyseven, not a misprint.

[Rain'ard]

This in my mind is a sitation which becomes a plolitcal issue and where left and right find yet another battle ground.

I sympathise with the OP because he has standards in the upbringing of his children where others have not or or undermining his effort by making money exploiting his children with pornography of sex and gore. The solution may be state school councellors visting and examining pupils if this becomes endemic, so no prizes for gessing who'll be paying for it

[okaycuckoo]

Internet needs policing. Kids need policing.

It's good for them to learn the skills to avoid the long arm of the state.

[ken_ichikawa]

Not just porn but extreme violence, beheadings etc.

Call me archaic but it needs to be regulated, sites like rotten.com have no place in a civilised society and anyone who peruses stuff like that for giggles wants to have a serious word with themselves. Kids having unrestricted access to that sort of material worries me as much as the porn does. I think I'd be very Victorian Dad about the whole internet thing, no computer in their room or where I couldn't see it, no access to social networking sites until they are at least 16...basically I'd be keeping a very beady eye on what went on. You wouldn't be able to stop everything but I'd do my utmost not to empower it.

It's a bit sad when you think about it, society has been handed the most powerful informative tool in history and has, up until now, mostly succeeded in filling it with absolute shit.

Why? are you one of those idiots who blantantly ignores the T&C of EVERY ISP in the UK? ISPs in the UK demand that you supervise minors.

If you do not then you're an idiot no different from those people complaining about video nasties.

And why? Rotten.com has a niche interest the images do nothing for me nor do they shock me at all, it has managed to survive for 10+ years therefore there is interest in it, you saying oh we've got to ban this and that because I don't like it. The online universe is the ultimate television if you don't like it then simply don't look at it.

Murders crime and stuff happen the shooting in cumbria is a good example, gun control no gun control things happen.

Preaching oh I don't like this therefore you cannot see it is what communist china preaches

it is a slippery slope. No doubt there are many deniers who don't like to see the economic truths of the UK economy, fine lets ban this too then.

I think children should be removed completely from the online world, parents who let their children browse at all or unsupervised hit with a £2000 fine which cannot be escaped via bankrupcy. I actually phoned in on the wright stuff about 7 years ago when idiot parents let their child browse online unsupervised and she met with a US marine.

[ken_ichikawa]

As a parent, I'm mortified by the stuff out there.... I know you can't protect kids forever, but I think a 6 year old should not be watching bukkake vids!!

Any thoughts?

Why are you allowing them to browse unsupervised or without some serious blocking software? It is YOU who is the idiot here and it is YOU who is irresponsible here. I'm not a smegging parent but even I have a sense of responsibility.

What you are saying is akin to giving your child an AK47 loaded and then complaining to the AK47 manufacturers about it when something goes wrong. We know the online universe is a free fire zone it has been for a while. Ken managed to get his internet name in a national news paper once regarding a really unfortunate incident.

You sir are a fool and you are merely abdicating your responsibility. I bet you want other people to pay for your children too don't you?

[ken_ichikawa]

Internet needs policing. Kids need policing.

It's good for them to learn the skills to avoid the long arm of the state.

No the internet does not need policing, it has always been a free fire zone.

Children need to removed from the internet and prudes need to not look at things they don't like and quit complaining, as simply you don't have to look you know.

It also does not take into account changing attitudes, so while Methuselah here, might take offense to a nipple or anything more than an ankle. Times a changin'. And if methuselah here got his way we'd be like Singapore a fascist totalitarian state that makes China look liberal.

[Rain'ard]

I think the OP is concerned about the times when they are at an age where he himself would not be there all the time. Such things do have a life time effect on people. Try asking the real heros of this world those that have had to clear up after Lockabie etc

[ken_ichikawa]

I think the OP is concerned about the times when they are at an age where he himself would not be there all the time. Such things do have a life time effect on people. Try asking the real heros of this world those that have had to clear up after Lockabie etc

Remove the router? It is incredibly simple with free software to restrict and cripple the hell out of your internet connection.

You are wrong having an effect on one person is not the same as having an effect on all people it affects some people much like gluten affects some people banning it would be stupid.

You also have to consider what kind of effect things have on people.

People who I have seen die (i.e. lorry goes over them their heads come off or their legs are torn off) the death doesn't shock or surprise me the gore element, the losing of a good friend does upset me greatly. But the gore no general indifference.

In the end we are just biological machines made of flesh, and seeing it broken apart is no different from a wrecked car. You only have to watch the traffic flow at car crashes it always snarls up as people slow down to get a free look at Gore.

The film Pretty Woman had a nice scene which summed this up greatly where tourists took pictures of murder victims as they were interested in it.

[Kingding]

name='ken_ichikawa' date='07 June 2010 - 07:58 AM' timestamp='1275897505' post='2558537']

Why? are you one of those idiots who blantantly ignores the T&C of EVERY ISP in the UK? ISPs in the UK demand that you supervise minors.

If you do not then you're an idiot no different from those people complaining about video nasties.

Bit rude eh Ken?

I don't look at video nasties, I have had plenty of people who assume I want to watch them when they shove their mobile with a video of someone getting topped in some gruesome fashion under my nose or they think it's appropriate to send me emails with videos of the same because they find it in some way "amusing". I do not.

And why? Rotten.com has a niche interest the images do nothing for me nor do they shock me at all, it has managed to survive for 10+ years therefore there is interest in it, you saying oh we've got to ban this and that because I don't like it. The online universe is the ultimate television if you don't like it then simply don't look at it.

Thats your issue, someone wants to watch it then fine, I personally find that pretty revolting myself but I find that some people can be quite revolting at times so I can live with that. When I was in the Fire Service we used to cut people out of cars that were in all sorts of gory states and it was horrific, the fact that some people would want to watch that to pass the time is something I find singularly abhorrent and drops my faith in humanity to somewhere far below contempt.

Also just because it's "niche" doesn't mean I want my kids looking at it.

Murders crime and stuff happen the shooting in cumbria is a good example, gun control no gun control things happen.

[Preaching oh I don't like this therefore you cannot see it is what communist china preaches

it is a slippery slope. No doubt there are many deniers who don't like to see the economic truths of the UK economy, fine lets ban this too then.

Irrelevant, the economic **** up isn't the same as a video of someone being killed, the economy is in the national interest, voyeuristically watching a beheading in your living room wearing your pants is not.

I think children should be removed completely from the online world, parents who let their children browse at all or unsupervised hit with a £2000 fine which cannot be escaped via bankrupcy. I actually phoned in on the wright stuff about 7 years ago when idiot parents let their child browse online unsupervised and she met with a US marine.

I pretty much agree with this, any parent who does not supervise their child on the net is seriously irresponsible.

[ken_ichikawa]

Bit rude eh Ken?

I apologise, my sister phoned me up this morning and wants to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, she bought an £80K house in 2006 (she said it was 80K anyway though maybe she's lying) she worked 2.5 jobs in which to pay the mortgage off and surprising because she never has time to spend her money at 35 she is going to be very shortly mortgage free, will quit 1.5 jobs and only do one job.

She floored me this morning as she wanted to re-mortgage to BTL x2 properties... she might well bankrupt herself but will blackmail me into bailing her out.

[Rain'ard]

Remove the router? It is incredibly simple with free software to restrict and cripple the hell out of your internet connection.

You are wrong having an effect on one person is not the same as having an effect on all people it affects some people much like gluten affects some people banning it would be stupid.

You also have to consider what kind of effect things have on people.

People who I have seen die (i.e. lorry goes over them their heads come off or their legs are torn off) the death doesn't shock or surprise me the gore element, the losing of a good friend does upset me greatly. But the gore no general indifference.

In the end we are just biological machines made of flesh, and seeing it broken apart is no different from a wrecked car. You only have to watch the traffic flow at car crashes it always snarls up as people slow down to get a free look at Gore.

The film Pretty Woman had a nice scene which summed this up greatly where tourists took pictures of murder victims as they were interested in it.

This is true for you yes. We have cliifs where we live and many suicides take place. I beleive the police have a policy of keeping the victim out iof sight to the general public. Some would have a different veiw if they were riding to worrk and you came round the corner and there was someone splattered on the deck. Unfortnately we cannot guarantee it's you ridding his bike.

[ken_ichikawa]

This is true for you yes. We have cliifs where we live and many suicides take place. I beleive the police have a policy of keeping the victim out iof sight to the general public. Some would have a different veiw if they were riding to worrk and you came round the corner and there was someone splattered on the deck. Unfortnately we cannot guarantee it's you ridding his bike.

This is precisely my point in that people are different you can't blanket ban things because one person or a group of people don't like it.

Also how does this differ from shock value of cigarette advertising?

Drive save or you'll end up like this type situations.

[blankster]

A certain amount of censorship would be desirarable. As far as porn or nudity goes, the main thing is that only consenting adults should be depicted and there should be safeguards against people who don't want to see it accidentally coming across images.

What I find more disturbing is the amount of really sick stuff posted on the net - gruesome accidents etc. I don't look at these but just from when these sometimes crop up in searches to do with, say, railways, give an idea of how prevalent sick stuff is.

There's another aspect of the internet where perhaps some control is needed too. Less graphic but potentially just as harmful. That is the area of inaccurate information. There's a lot of nonsense posted on the net. Where it's obviously nonsense it doesn't matter so much, but where a source appears to be reputable but info is wrong it could be damaging or inflammatory.

[nixy]

I apologise, my sister phoned me up this morning and wants to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, she bought an £80K house in 2006 (she said it was 80K anyway though maybe she's lying) she worked 2.5 jobs in which to pay the mortgage off and surprising because she never has time to spend her money at 35 she is going to be very shortly mortgage free, will quit 1.5 jobs and only do one job.

She floored me this morning as she wanted to re-mortgage to BTL x2 properties... she might well bankrupt herself but will blackmail me into bailing her out.

What?, like the the banks & tax money?? too big to fail.

People (sis) will take take risk if they know there is a safety net (you).

??

[Guest X-QUORK]

There are thousands of different Browsing Filters available online, I can't believe they're all rubbish. The internet shouldn't be censored.

[Kingding]

I apologise, my sister phoned me up this morning and wants to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, she bought an £80K house in 2006 (she said it was 80K anyway though maybe she's lying) she worked 2.5 jobs in which to pay the mortgage off and surprising because she never has time to spend her money at 35 she is going to be very shortly mortgage free, will quit 1.5 jobs and only do one job.

She floored me this morning as she wanted to re-mortgage to BTL x2 properties... she might well bankrupt herself but will blackmail me into bailing her out.

Accepted mate, no bother

Sorry about your situation though, that blows.

[Rain'ard]

This is precisely my point in that people are different you can't blanket ban things because one person or a group of people don't like it.

Also how does this differ from shock value of cigarette advertising?

Drive save or you'll end up like this type situations.

I see your point at the hypocrasy and that is what it is. In fact taking it further I think it is worse than that. It boaders on abuse of power by those who are in charge of our lives. So we are agreed I hope that there is an issue with the exploitaion of gore. But I just like to add veiwing images on the internet is not much like the real thing, it's just living a second hand life.

[Riedquat]

Which is sicker, wanting to watch some of the vile stuff on the internet or wanting to get rid of it?

[Tiger Woods?]

The internet should not be censored at source. Yes, there is plenty of stuff on there which the world would be better off without, but the problem is that the censors have a habit of removing other stuff that should be there. Just look at what managed to find itself on Australia's black list that was only supposed to consist of child pornography etc., but soon included parts of wikipedia, wikileaks and other sites that the government didn't like.

There are plenty of ways in which a concerned parent can control what is accessed on the internet from home. Internet "censorship" should start at home and stay at home.

The internet is probably the last place one can get independent information. Governments and other major players do not like this, and would like it throttled and turned into a combination "infotainment" and approved shopping channel.

[DeepLurker]

In a few years time I will (hopefully) be a happy daddy. There will be a 'family computer' in the lounge/kitchen, with full logging of all activity. I will try to let them wander free on the intartubes - it's an incredible creation, and the risk of them occasionally stumbling across "2 girls, one cup" for me is an acceptable price to pay in order to tear them away from the TV set and its insidious mind conditioning by the admen.

No way would I ever put a computer in my kid's bedroom. That would be the same as giving a 10-year old a ticket to a Fetish Club party.

[kingsgate]

I wouldn't worry too much about what rude or nasty pics kids might see on the internet.

These things go on, so they may as well know about them.

They are only pictures, in the end.

[Dubai]

Why are you allowing them to browse unsupervised or without some serious blocking software? It is YOU who is the idiot here and it is YOU who is irresponsible here. I'm not a smegging parent but even I have a sense of responsibility.

What you are saying is akin to giving your child an AK47 loaded and then complaining to the AK47 manufacturers about it when something goes wrong. We know the online universe is a free fire zone it has been for a while. Ken managed to get his internet name in a national news paper once regarding a really unfortunate incident.

You sir are a fool and you are merely abdicating your responsibility. I bet you want other people to pay for your children too don't you?

Ken, I've seen your earlier excuse, but there really is no need to start calling people fools and idiots, especially when you are making assumptions. I take my responsibilities as a parent very seriously, which is why I have raised the question.

There are thousands of different Browsing Filters available online, I can't believe they're all rubbish. The internet shouldn't be censored.

Thanks for the tip.... I'll have a look at some and see if they help.

Which is sicker, wanting to watch some of the vile stuff on the internet or wanting to get rid of it?

The internet should not be censored at source. Yes, there is plenty of stuff on there which the world would be better off without, but the problem is that the censors have a habit of removing other stuff that should be there. Just look at what managed to find itself on Australia's black list that was only supposed to consist of child pornography etc., but soon included parts of wikipedia, wikileaks and other sites that the government didn't like.

There are plenty of ways in which a concerned parent can control what is accessed on the internet from home. Internet "censorship" should start at home and stay at home.

The internet is probably the last place one can get independent information. Governments and other major players do not like this, and would like it throttled and turned into a combination "infotainment" and approved shopping channel.

I am certainly not proposing net censorship at source, i.e. getting rid of anything!

My problem is that I'd like to let the kids look at parts of the net without being exposed to others. The net certainly is more stimulating than TV and I feel could be valuable in helping them learn how to gather information.

I do have "parental controls" set on the computer, but it's really limiting and takes a lot of time... even the kids sites link to other sites which have to be approved etc. However, it's what I do now.

On their iPods though, and I suspect many mobile phones etc, there is no facility to do that. So I have completely disabled the internet and YouTube..... they can't get online, period. The Apps are rated, so I've set the appropriate age limits which means they don't even see software for 12+.

I also have just discovered ( blush!) that Google can be filtered too...... which means when I'm helping them with a project, I'm not accidentally pulling up references to adult sites!

So, in a nutshell, they are supervised to the point that I'm forever peering over their shoulders. But, if there was some sort of ratings system for sites, then it would be much easier to police and also allow them more freedom to explore.

I believe site rating is perhaps the simplest way around it.... pretty much everything else is rated.... why not websites?