UK porn opt-in-plan

Wow, if there's money to be had through licensing, they'll do it. Is it the porn they're really after I wonder, or if this is setting the stage to firewall off everything that may not be 'government approved'?

I personally have no interest in viewing porn online, and if I was a parent, I'd be horrified if my kids were watching it. I read a report recently (in the good 'ol Daily Mail, admittedly!) that a really high percentage of children were looking at online porn on a regular basis, and that experts were warning that it was damaging their development. So for that reason I'm all for much stricter controls on online porn. Having said that, I thought it was possible for parents to use "parental controls" online to block that sort of thing? Why aren't more parents using that option?

But I do have my concerns. As you say, it's possible that this censorship is the thin end of the wedge, and may not stop at porn. I think that the legislation will need to be worded really carefully, so that it can't be used for general censorship and lead to the erosion of free speech.

Mandy

This is undoubtably the start of another slippery slope. There seems to be a current trend to attack the internet and starting with reports over porn turning kids into rapists seems to be a pretty good agenda to get the 'think of the kids' crowd frothing at the mouth, and legislation passed with populist support.

I am kinda for having some sort of blanket opt out option whereby you can request that porn isnt listed in searches and available to look at - but feel this should be voluntary and on an individual basis.

i bet he just wants to piss off millions of wives and girlfriends. you opted in??

thoreau wrote:
That's exactly it thor... it should be the other way round - opt out, rather than opt in.


It's definaitely a move that's ultimate agenda will be for more and more restrictions on our use of the net and not that he's trying to curb the issues of porn. So I think he's deliberately targeting the main area he'll get support in from a public perspective.

Nice move Cameron... but you best watch out you don't cut your nose to spite your face as we wouldn't want you to lose any of those profits you make from this very lucrative industry as that just wouldn't do

No cigarettes, no money, no porn, no jobs...

Why do I keep fecking waking up every morning?

I agree with sketts and thor - definitely has nothing to do with protecting 'the children'. But that's how it'll be sold. What on earth is wrong with people?

you could prolly get a call center job dealing with all teh people opting in

quietgirl wrote:
If I were a parent, I wouldn't want my children to view that either. Like you pointed out, there are parental controls to be utilized. For windows users, by default the standard controls are limited to controlling how long a user can use their account, when, what programs, etc. It doesn't come with internet filtering options, but that can be downloaded via windows live. It's not difficult to use either.

Windows live family safety

There are many alternatives out there, most of them are not free though.

thoreau wrote:
That would make the most sense. They could still possibly make their money, but less if people had to opt in for porn.

batou wrote:
When life gives you lemons, take a job at the opt in center for porn activation... Er make lemonade.

Mrindigo wrote:
I feel a cunning plan coming on...

Ab Origine wrote:
There's a really dirty pun in there somewhere I just can't see it yet

psketti wrote:
Yeah, thought it was a bit obvious though, even for me.

Ab Origine wrote:
I'm somewhat distracted today...

psketti wrote:
Am I to ask "why"?

Nope

psketti wrote:
Weirdo...

Absolutely

... and you love me for it

Well tbh back in the day it was just a good old wank mag Mayfair, razzle not that I was an expet or anything Bit of tit, kitty and if they were really daring maybe a f/f kiss . If you wanted something a bit more raunchy that dealt with a bit of I think the local sex shop was the place to go.

Now the net is just full of every fucking perversion under the sun, and the extreme shit is just there full on. This is what the danger is imo.
Ive 4 boys from 9-18 and have never caught them looking at any porn,but that does not mean the don't, as they have not caught me either

This issue was discussed at some length at the other place.

For me, it's all about freedom of choice and disguising something as something other than it is, in this instance.

My argument re censorship has always been if they really want to look at stuff, no kind of legislation will make any odds.

I remember in my 'yoot' we used to find all sorts re mags and stuff, usually just dumped outside after being bought by someone older/an adult. Plus, we never had things like i-phones and laptops in school (imagine that) with free and easy access to wi-fi anywhere within the school grounds.

Also, if you really are that concerned about kids seeing stuff online, perhaps they shouldn't be left alone with it/more preparations should be made re filters and such.

Just seems daft to employ yet further legislation in an area that should really have little to do with our governments in the first place. 'The slippery slope' has already been mentioned and this appears to me to be exactly what this is. What next for our own good?