You'll have to 'opt in' <wink wink>

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14512

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/ ... -providers

Quote:

People who want to watch pornography online will have to 'opt in' with their internet service providers under measures to be announced by the PM. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.

There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or services which they believe are inappropriate for children.

The site, which will direct complaints to the regulator dealing with that specific area of concern, is expected to be run by watchdogs including the Advertising Standards Authority, BBC Trust, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council and Pan European Game Information.

The service providers involved are BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin. Customers who do not opt in to adult content will be unableto access pornographic websites.

Cameron gave strong backing in June to the Mothers' Union proposals after he commissioned a six-month review by the charity's chief executive, Reg Bailey. However, Cameron did not commit to legislation.

Bailey's recommendations included providing parents with one single website to make it easier to complain about any programme, advert, product or service, putting age restrictions on music videos and ensuring retailers offer age-appropriate clothes for children.

Cameron wrote to Bailey in June to thank him for his report. "I very much agree with the central approach you set out," the letter said.

"As you say, we should not try and wrap children up in cotton wool or simply throw our hands up and accept the world as it is. Instead, we should look to put 'the brakes on an unthinking drift towards ever-greater commercialisation and sexualisation'."

Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans.

However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

Is there a website where I can complain about religious mothers' lobbying groups

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14512

Craster wrote:

Is there a website where I can complain about religious mothers' lobbying groups

But wont you think of the children !!!

Squirt · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 6584

The head of Mother's Union is called Reg? How did he get past the membership committee?

Malc74 · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 12:54

Squirt wrote:

The head of Mother's Union is called Reg? How did he get past the membership committee?

He was wearing an underwired bra and a T-shirt with a suggestive slogan on it...

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:02

Squirt wrote:

The head of Mother's Union is called Reg? How did he get past the membership committee?

On a similar note, there was advert in the sandwich shop for the 'Black Dyke Band' which amused me. Sadly, they weren't playing here.

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:06

More details are here. I'll have a sift through, but it appears that some ISPs will offer an 'opt in' to the controls, rather than having to have people 'opt out'.

The Grauniad's technical editor says

Quote:

But the reality is much more subtle. If you're already on a contract with an ISP, nothing will change. Let's say that again: nothing will change. Only if you change ISP or move to a new contract will you be confronted with a decision - and even then, it will be a fork in the internet road, where you can either choose to have "parental controls" on your system, or choose not to have them. There is no obligation or presumption either way.

And the brook Advisory Services man makes a good point:

Quote:

We absolutely agree that we need to help young people make sense of the world they live in, the sexualised imagery they see and to help them understand that porn is porn and real life relationships aren't like that.

This might seem like a solution to make adults feel better but we're not convinced that this will help young people take control of their relationships. Our websites were blocked to mobile devices when filters were introduced and we had to really insist that we were allowed.

What the Bailey review didn't address is how you help young people to take control of their bodies and relationships. Sex and relationship education is a core part of how you can understand complicated information on the internet. We are concerned that either intentionally or unintentionally people won tbe able to get accurate unbiased information via the internet because if they use the word sex they won't be able to get it.

Either way we're not convinced that this will help young people and would be really concerned that those providers are filtering out the information young people need. They need to be cognisant of the fact that this has the potential to undermine young people's ability to get accurate information – and parents as well who want help answering their children's questions. We would urge them to work with the experts to try and ensure that this doesn't happen.

Squirt · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 6584

Don't most ISPs offer some form of parental controls now anyway ( even if it's one of those McAffee control things )?

And all the kids are getting their porn over non-http means now anyway. I can't see this stopping you downloading SEXXXXYRedH0tLEsbains.mp4 over some p2p network.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

Government in not understanding technology shocker.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

Also, Big Society not Big Government. Unless you fancy a wank.

devilman · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:29

I wonder if there's a Fathers' Union that want the Mothers' Union blocked.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

There is, but they're not secret, they just know it's not worth the hassle to disagree.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

They're the least effective organisation in political history. They have to date issued thirteen thousand seven hundred and forty-two press releases, every single one of which is "Yes, Dear".

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

From Mali's quote: "porn is porn and real life relationships aren't like that."

Ahem, perhaps not for you, you shrivelled prune.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38596

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

From Mali's quote: "porn is porn and real life relationships aren't like that."

Ahem, perhaps not for you, you shrivelled prune.

ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!

Kissyfur's Sex Life (S(ish)FW)

ElephantBanjoGnome · **Joined:** 22nd Dec, 2010 **Posts:** 8175

ISP-level porn blocks is something I'd support if I were a parent. When I were a nipper we had to make do with catalog photos of ladies in arguably see-through bras. In a modern internet where you're two clicks away from an HD video of a naked woman shitting in another naked woman's mouth*, an opt-out for my kids seems... sensible.

* apparently. I personally wouldn't have any idea.

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:41

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

From Mali's quote: "porn is porn and real life relationships aren't like that."

Ahem, perhaps not for you, you shrivelled prune.

I suspect that it's a set up to lead down the "Porn is bad as it objectifies and degrades vulnerable women" line. Whereas the reality is that it's highly unlikely they were going to become vets, and we're really only losing humanities and social science students to strip clubs. If teenagers want to re-enact scenes they've seen form the internet, probably better porn scenes than base jumping or whatever.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

ElephantBanjoGnome wrote:

ISP-level porn blocks is something I'd support if I were a parent. When I were a nipper we had to make do with catalog photos of ladies in arguably see-through bras. In a modern internet where you're two clicks away from an HD video of a naked woman shitting in another naked woman's mouth*, an opt-out for my kids seems... sensible.[/size]

I think I'd support an open agendaless discussion on possible options for appropriate blocking methods. An ISP level blocklist is:

1) Easy to circumvent
2) Guaranteed to trap legit sites for whatever reason, and I bet getting your site unblacklisted will be a nightmare

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:46

There's a Dilbert cartoon about something like this, and Dogbert makes the point that you would be pitting your programming skills against the collective lust of a nation's 12-17 year old boys.

devilman · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:49

Mr Russell · **Joined:** 6th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 12328

How on earth do they then decide what is classified as porn, and what gets blocked?

Decca · **Joined:** 23rd Jun, 2010 **Posts:** 2282

This is bullshit. What is the criteria for what the "mother's union" considers porn? Also why was I never given membership to said union, how big is it, and who the fuck do they think they are doing this shit in my name without asking me? Back to the what is porn thing, 4 chan? reddit? Any site that has pictures of titties on it?

You know what I do to stop my kids seeing porn accidentally? By having their god damn laptop right next to mine, if I'm not sat here on my computer you can bet your arse they are not sat there on theirs, this will continue till they are 16 because there is no way in hell my kids are going to be those irritating "fuk u fag giv me gld" shitheels in world of warcraft.

These dumb bitches might want to try doing some freaking parenting instead of being so judgemental. I bet you 90% of these women give more of a shit about the idea that their husbands have access to porn and want a way to keep track of it rather than worrying that the 6 year old will mistakenly go from barbie.com to xxxbarbie.com

/rage

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:53

MaliA wrote:

There's a Dilbert cartoon about something like this, and Dogbert makes the point that you would be pitting your programming skills against the collective lust of a nation's 12-17 year old boys.

Which is interesting, as I'm not sure that there is an age in which a lady is allowed to have lustful thoughts, even today. Depsite the average age of a girl having sex is something like 16 or so. But, I've been around that block before.

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 13:53

devilman wrote:

.

That's the one! I don't know why it sticks in my brain.

ElephantBanjoGnome · **Joined:** 22nd Dec, 2010 **Posts:** 8175

My kids will need to be seriously clever to circumvent the blocks I'm going to put on every internet-capable device they own. If they're smart enough to circumvent it, fair enough.

Then they'll go to their mate's house with fuzzy liberal parents and it'll be a shit-in-muoth porn fest.

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10138

Decca wrote:

there is no way in hell my kids are going to be those irritating "fuk u fag giv me gld" shitheels in world of warcraft.

This is excellent,

Decca wrote:

shitheels

but this is magnificent. I love learning new words.

Shitheels.

Shitheels.

SHITHEELS!

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38596

BikNorton wrote:

SHITHEELS!

"GodDAMMIT!"

KovacsC · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 14:34

ElephantBanjoGnome wrote:

My kids will need to be seriously clever to circumvent the blocks I'm going to put on every internet-capable device they own. If they're smart enough to circumvent it, fair enough.

Then they'll go to their mate's house with fuzzy liberal parents and it'll be a shit-in-muoth porn fest.

Or do what most parents do, put the only PC they can use in the room where the family sit... easy.

Put family user controls on.. and make sure every account on any PC is set up properly and linked.

devilman · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 14:47

What about mobile phones too? Obviously if they're using wifi, the Mothers' Union of Misery (MUM) measures will cater for that, but I would imagine they could find stuff by going out via the mobile network? Or are there parental controls available there too?

KovacsC · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 14:49

There are parental controls on a mobile, but that can be overrided by Wifi connection, as I discovered when I was dabbling with my works phone at home..

KovacsC · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 14:50

I suppose you can block at the router...

GovernmentYard · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5318

Stupid parent complacency facilitator.

T'Mobile 'blocked porn' on my phone when I got it... and blocked it again a couple of times thereafter so I couldn't access sites when I needed to when out a couple of times. I game them what for. Amongst the adult content they blocked was Eurogamer. Must be all them Modern warfare 3 trailers.

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14512

devilman wrote:

.

There is also the follow on

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

Re: internet controls: What Decca (so magnificently) said. this isn't an issue for government or ISPs, it's an issue for parents - same as it's always been.

As for mobiles - MOBILES?! Why does a 12 year old need a mobile phone, let alone one with fucking internet access? Jesus christ.

Granted, by the time my kids are 12 we'll all have direct brain implants so it won't be an issue.

MaliA · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 15:12

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

As for mobiles - MOBILES?! Why does a 12 year old need a mobile phone, let alone one with fucking internet access? Jesus christ.

More to the point, why send a 12 year old out with £'00s worth of electronics kit on a daily basis?

Also, often, those phones are contract mobiles, and when they discover chat lines, £300 bills appear.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

No, we'll have brain implants. You won't, because you're a technopleb and you live in a field.

devilman · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 15:15

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

As for mobiles - MOBILES?! Why does a 12 year old need a mobile phone, let alone one with fucking internet access? Jesus christ.

In my defence, I only mentioned it as loads of kids seem to have them. I've gone a step further with protecting my children from seeing porn, by not having children in the first place. It's a bit drastic, but it's working.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

MaliA wrote:

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

As for mobiles - MOBILES?! Why does a 12 year old need a mobile phone, let alone one with fucking internet access? Jesus christ.

More to the point, why send a 12 year old out with £'00s worth of electronics kit on a daily basis?

Fuckin' a. When ours get mobiles, they'll be vintage nokia 6210s or whatever.

Quote:

Also, often, those phones are contract mobiles, and when they discover chat lines, £300 bills appear.

And ours'll be on PAYG. And they'll be doing the paying, not us.

Craster - I affect a certain ludditism, it's true, but I will always use stuff that I think's useful and/or cool. I just may have to keep emailing you to tell me how it works. The brain chip will doubtless result in me cold calling Gillian Anderson five times a minute.

@ Devilman - heh. But you raised a good point - most kids do have mobiles, and it irritates the fudge out of me.

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 15:25

The Grimlet has a simless iPhone, so I guess that counts. He can hit up mobilefilth.com as often as he likes.

I'm not yet convinced it would be bad for him to do so.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

Grim... wrote:

The Grimlet has a simless iPhone, so I guess that counts.
He can hit up mobilefilth.com as often as he likes.

I'm not yet convinced it would be bad for him to do so.

I'm a massive lefty liberal, as you know, and I'm very much a defender of porn generally. HOWEVER, I think there's something to be said for not disturbing the fuck out of a 5 year old with women (or men, for that matter, let's not be sexualityist) putting several cocks up themselves, in the same way that I suspect it might not be beneficial to let my kids watch a horror film until they're old enough.

Can Grimlet access the internet off the iPhone via your home wifi then?

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

As much as the right-wing tabloid press loves to exclaim that the internet makes it virtually impossible to avoid such multicock up-putting, I doubt a 5-year old would ever find such naughtiness on any kind of internet-enabled device.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

That said - I'm happy for them to watch Blue Planet and Planet Earth and suchlike, which shows reasonably graphic dismemberment. In fact we were watching Planet Dinosaur at the weekend and a plesiosaur got its head bitten off, and Second Born turns round as says "he can't talk any more daddy! Oh no!", and then went back to watching it quite happily. We later had a conversation about skeletons and blood and how the body works.

I guess the difference is you can't really hide nature and death and that from the kids (I've lost count of the dead things we've seen on walks), and nature programs are educational (I have a 4 1/2 year old who knows what phytoplankton is - it's awesome), but showing them stuff that is made solely to be scary and disturbing is another kettle of miscellaneous swimming things.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

Craster wrote:

As much as the right-wing tabloid press loves to exclaim that the internet makes it virtually impossible to avoid such multicock up-putting, I doubt a 5-year old would ever find such naughtiness on any kind of internet-enabled device.

Unless he hits his dad's bookmarks by accident.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49237

Well, quite. I would assume that if you're going to give a kid an internet enabled device, you've got the nous to sanitise it first.

KovacsC · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 15:59

My step son is payg.. saying that the ran up £50 on the landline in a month in 3 calls!!

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22362

KovacsC wrote:

My step son is payg..

Aren't they all?

Malc · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 16:12

KovacsC wrote:

My step son is payg.. saying that the ran up £50 on the landline in a month in 3 calls!!

A family we know's 13 year od daughter ran up a £1,000 quarterly landline bill. How the fuck can you do that in this day and age?

Malc

KovacsC · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 16:14

It was when we got the monthly bill, now he is barred from using the land line...

Also most phone companies allow you to set limits..

Mimi · **Joined:** 27th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 25863

Decca wrote:

These dumb bitches might want to try doing some freaking parenting instead of being so judgemental.

?

Grim... · **Posted:** Tue Oct 11, 2011 16:17

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

Can Grimlet access the internet off the iPhone via your home wifi then?

In theory yes, in practise he can't read or write, so not so useful.
He's getting the hang of Street Fighter 4 and Stoopid Sandwich, though.

I've got to say, I'd be far more worried about some of the violent stuff you can find online than boring old facials.

Be Excellent To Each Other

You'll have to 'opt in' <wink wink>

Who is online