Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Bye-bye sex sites ?

last reply
18 replies
1.7k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Internet sites could be given 'cinema-style age ratings', Culture Secretary says
Internet sites could be given cinema-style age ratings as part of a Government crackdown on offensive and harmful online activity to be launched in the New Year, the Culture Secretary says,
By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor
Last Updated: 1:24AM GMT 27 Dec 2008
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Andy Burnham says he believes that new standards of decency need to be applied to the web. He is planning to negotiate with Barack Obama’s incoming American administration to draw up new international rules for English language websites.
The Cabinet minister describes the internet as “quite a dangerous place” and says he wants internet-service providers (ISPs) to offer parents “child-safe” web services.
Giving film-style ratings to individual websites is one of the options being considered, he confirms. When asked directly whether age ratings could be introduced, Mr Burnham replies: “Yes, that would be an option. This is an area that is really now coming into full focus.”
****ISPs, such as BT, Tiscali, AOL or Sky could also be forced to offer internet services where the only websites accessible are those deemed suitable for children****
Mr Burnham also uses the interview to indicate that he will allocate money raised from the BBC’s commercial activities to fund other public-service broadcasting such as Channel Four. He effectively rules out sharing the BBC licence fee between broadcasters as others have recommended.
His plans to rein in the internet, and censor some websites, are likely to trigger a major row with online advocates who ferociously guard the freedom of the world wide web.
However, Mr Burnham said: “If you look back at the people who created the internet they talked very deliberately about creating a space that Governments couldn’t reach. I think we are having to revisit that stuff seriously now. It’s true across the board in terms of content, harmful content, and copyright. Libel is an emerging issue.
“There is content that should just not be available to be viewed. That is my view. Absolutely categorical. This is not a campaign against free speech, far from it; it is simply there is a wider public interest at stake when it involves harm to other people. We have got to get better at defining where the public interest lies and being clear about it.”
Mr Burnham reveals that he is currently considering a range of new safeguards. Initially, as with copyright violations, these could be policed by internet providers. However, new laws may be threatened if the initial approach is not successful.
“I think there is definitely a case for clearer standards online,” he said. “More ability for parents to understand if their child is on a site, what standards it is operating to. What are the protections that are in place?”
He points to the success of the 9pm television watershed at protecting children. The minister also backs a new age classification system on video games to stop children buying certain products.
Mr Burnham, himself a parent of three young children, says his goal is for internet providers to offer “child-safe” web services.
“It worries me - like anybody with children,” he says. “Leaving your child for two hours completely unregulated on the internet is not something you can do. This isn’t about turning the clock back. The internet has been empowering and democratising in many ways but we haven’t yet got the stakes in the ground to help people navigate their way safely around…what can be a very, very complex and quite dangerous world.”
Mr Burnham also wants new industry-wide “take down times”. This means that if websites such as YouTube or Facebook are alerted to offensive or harmful content they will have to remove it within a specified time once it is brought to their attention.
He also says that the Government is considering changing libel laws to give people access to cheap low-cost legal recourse if they are defamed online. The legal proposals are being drawn up by the Ministry of Justice.
Mr Burnham admits that his plans may be interpreted by some as “heavy-handed” but says the new standards drive is “utterly crucial”. Mr Burnham also believes that the inauguration of Barack Obama, the President-Elect, presents an opportunity to implement the major changes necessary for the web.
“The change of administration is a big moment. We have got a real opportunity to make common cause,” he says. “The more we seek international solutions to this stuff – the UK and the US working together – the more that an international norm will set an industry norm.”
The Culture Secretary is spending the Christmas holidays at his constituency in Lancashire but is planning to take major decisions on the future of public-service broadcasting in the New Year. Channel Four is facing a £150m shortfall in its finances and is calling for extra Government help. ITV is also growing increasingly alarmed about the financial implications of meeting the public-service commitments of its licenses.
Mr Burnham says that he is prepared to offer further public assistance to broadcasters other than the BBC. However, he indicates that he does not favour “top-slicing” the licence fee. Instead, he may share the profits of the BBC Worldwide, which sells the rights to programmes such as Strictly Come Dancing to foreign broadcasters.
“I feel it is important to sustain quality content beyond the BBC,” he said. “The real priorities I have got in my mind are regional news, quality children’s content and original British children’s content, current affairs documentaries – that’s important. The thing now is to be absolutely clear on what the public wants to see beyond the BBC.
“Top-slicing the licence fee is an option that is going to have to remain on the table. I have to say it is not the option that I instinctively reach for first. I think there are other avenues to be explored.”
interesting piece.
this bit stood out to me
ISPs, such as BT, Tiscali, AOL or Sky could also be forced to offer internet services where the only websites accessible are those deemed suitable for children
now in todays current climat of buissnesss going under do they really think it fair to enforce companies in what they can offer their customers?
im with BT, and if they made it that i could only access sites that are suitable for children then i would cancel my broad band with them.
Im a adult ffs, and its my choice what sites i visit.
this site for instance would not be accessable, i would no longer be able to buy sex toys on line.
What right do the government have to censor what i view if its not illegal??
this will not happen in my opinion.
i dont use any of these bingo sites, but im sure many do, you have to be 18 to gamble so those sites wold be barred.
there are content control options in place on the computers, so parents need to take control.
not all households have children in them, why the feck should their viewing be restricted?
i understand there is little control of whats out there on the www, but in my opinion this is the governments idea of a ceep and lazy way out of policing the stuff that goes on.
xx fem xx
The net is way to big to be completly censored in that manner.
The goverment cannot order ISP's to to block adult material, that covers to many aspects of life that is not related to porn, and is tantamount to dictatorship like thay have in China.
But having a sensible way of stopping the more extreme and illigal stuff from being shown is something that needs to happen.
But how they do it with infringing basic freedom rights I have no idea dunno
It's just some idiot in a suit who has no concept of how the internet works coming up with a "brilliant idea".
It's already in the bin, next please!
In 1993, Internet pioneer John Gilmore said "the net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it".
As it was, as it shall always be smile
The internet horse has already bolted, or to put it another way the internet cat is already out of the bag! wink
It's an outrage! If push comes to shove I'll form a SH party to stand as opposition to these faceless bureaucrats! Who's with me?! lol
That'll make life easier - just google for 18-rated sites biggrin Saves typing in all the different (bad) spellings of porn, sex, shag etc etc :D
Mind you, sites that have a rating would be easier to filter using netnanny etc. You could filter all without a rating as well as all with specific ratings.
I agree with the concern that it could lead to full censorship - but I can't honestly see it happening. The IPS's know where the customers are and what they are looking at and would fight an exclusion clause in their licenses.
Quote by foxylady2209
That'll make life easier - just google for 18-rated sites biggrin Saves typing in all the different (bad) spellings of porn, sex, shag etc etc :D
Mind you, sites that have a rating would be easier to filter using netnanny etc. You could filter all without a rating as well as all with specific ratings.
I agree with the concern that it could lead to full censorship - but I can't honestly see it happening. The IPS's know where the customers are and what they are looking at and would fight an exclusion clause in their licenses.

A lot of sex sites (and other sorts of adult orientated sites) are already self-rated using ICRA. In fact this very site we're on now uses ICRA ratings to help prevent children accessing it.
First of all the internet is very good at regulating itself because it has to be.
Secondly it's impossible to regulate it by legislation because there's no such thing as a world government nor is there any one person or organisation in control of it. It is every government's worst nightmare: Freedom - real freedom - for the masses.
Quote by Sixfootsix
It's just some idiot in a suit who has no concept of how the internet works coming up with a "brilliant idea".
It's already in the bin, next please!

Absolutely. S'pose it at least gets this unknown Minister's name in the paper, in a something must be done kinda way. rolleyes There are already applications out there that filter content. They're installed in every school in the land. The internet is already "child safe", so long as parents take the time to monitor and block access. Noone really needs a government edict to enforce good parenting, surely?
N x x x ;)
I feel that this was always going to happen with the Internet.
The reason being is that since the start Humans have always tried to control others having information.
Hence America & the U.K going all 'tag-team' to control the Internet.
I can agree that certain sites need deleting the sort that Gary 'wanna be in my gang' (erm.. no thanks mate) was caught looking on thanks to P.C World fixing his computer& informing the Police.
Yet what are the views of the American & U.K Governments on sites like this... confused:
What do they decide is illegal & legal... :?:
What happens if a person uncovers another 'Watergate' by using the Internet to inform others.
This will well be shut down.
I think the Culture Minister going all proud about the 9pm Watershed on British Television better have a look at what I've watched on...
Morning Television & content that's within Soap Opera's that broadcast on Prime Family Time.
Get your house in order, mate.
Before going into the Digtal realm.
This will never come to anything - just an MP trying to get some column inches.
The great firewall of China is easy enough to route around with minimal knowhow, and if they can't do it, we'll certainly fail.
The only thing that worries me is it's something else IT related for the government to waste our money on before realising it's impossible. But the chances are they will have been slung out by the time it gets started, so probably nothing to worry about.
Quote by ChairmanMiaow
This will never come to anything - just an MP trying to get some column inches.
The great firewall of China is easy enough to route around with minimal knowhow, and if they can't do it, we'll certainly fail.
The only thing that worries me is it's something else IT related for the government to waste our money on before realising it's impossible. But the chances are they will have been slung out by the time it gets started, so probably nothing to worry about.

What ChairmanMiaow wrote. :thumbup:
Most of the current gov IT projects started over 15 years ago.......and continue to drag-on.
Taken as a whole, the gov IT projects are 86 years behind completion and nearly 20 billion over budget.
We could have the Monster Raving Loony Party running the gov and the same projects would keep appearing.
You elect your mp, and thence the party running the show, but the GOVERNMENT of the country is the UNelected people who are ALWAYS there.
It's called "continuity", and ensures that government keeps going no matter who the figurehead party are.
Next problem ?
The £1 public service pension "black hole"
Yes, that is £1,000,000,000,000.
That is more than the combined private company pensions black holes of the whole country.
Come to think of it, it is more than the combined private pension investments of this country.
In fact, the combined private pension investments is about £23 across the developed world...

Went to check me then signed out to only read this article on :
New powers for police to hack into UK computers:

Now the Police don't even need a court order :!: :shock:
Just the permission of the Chief Constable, how cosy, indeed. confused
Yet what the article doesn't say is what happens if nothing is found :?: Do the Police or the lovely Chief Constable's inform the individual whoms P.C & files have been hacked into, perhaps?
Maybe not, I think.
In history all Goverments or People in Power start with wanting to 'protect the people' but this belief transforms in something a lot darker or sinister.
Even the flim 'The Dark Knight' has an element of what is accessible around cyber digital surveillance.
Bruce Wayne hacking into the Gotham City CCTV System to keep tabs on his ex-girlfriend & her NEW boyfriend.
The use & morals of hacking into people's Mobile Phones.
So if a flim about a Man dressed as a Bat can give the morals that this is wrong then what is our Government doing... :? redface
I'm sure that with the ability to remotely "read" from your hd comes the ability to remotely "write" to same.
So they'll always find something...even if they have to put it there themselves.
Better check the firewall......
Another Monday morning tosser, with nothing in their in trays.
Will never work.
This is all a preamble really - what riles the governments of the world much more than censorship is that nagging feeling in the back of their minds that somehow the internet is so huge they should be able to TAX it more. All the issues of control and governance of the net are really a lead up to trying to get a buck from it for the haves which means ultimately taking control from the have nots who currently own the internet. Its worth considering next time you have the option of using a small independant site for some purpose or its bigger corporate brother . In a way it was kinda why we got so tense and negative when the new management took over at SH - as it turns out so far they havent let their economics ruin the site so good on em. Long may it remain so - little corners of the net like this truly demonstrate its power all be it in a small focused world.