Looking “Behind the Filter”

Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have. – Harry Emerson Fosdick

The Conservatives, single handily (no pun intended) trying to dismantle the "man sized" tissue production industry. 

I enjoy a good debate, hearing the other side of the story is an all important part of politics and coming to a full considered opinion. However, when someone looks like these words are going to fall out of their mouth: “Speaking as a mother” I secretly try to choke them using the force.

Basically Claire Perry is on a mission, she wants to stop young children looking at what could be potentially damaging and degrading pornography on the internet. The problem is that the block on ‘adult content’ will not just stop children from arousing their curiosities but will be the first time that a part of the internet will be effectively censored by the British government. She’s on a mission to stop horny teenagers and lonely old men from doing what comes naturally when they’ve got five minutes spare. Doesn’t she realize that this will destroy the disposable tissue industry in this country? The issue now is that David Cameron seems unable to ban smoking or drinking so in a vain attempt to win the middle class voters back who need something to worry about corrupting their darling children that the government must be doing something about – he’s decided that wanking is what he needs to crusade against.

The problem with all of this though is that the war is already won, you can actively censor parts of the internet with a radical new technology called ‘Norton internet security’ (other brands are available) it comes on this thing call a CD, or compact disk, and after a few windows of installation you can create your own tiny censorship programme while, although imperfect, will be able to stop your little rascals seeing something that might worry a middle class mother, or worse yet a Daily Mail ‘columnist’. If they work out how to get round it, congratulations you have yourself one intelligent tott that, heaven forbid, might need to you sit down and have a little chat about the basics of the birds and the bees.

Leaving aside Ms Perry’s oversight of existing ‘advanced’ technologies that already can do what she proposes should be forced upon every home, at an expense to the taxpayer we can imagine, the main objection that I have with the proposals is it is another example of government interference in people’s lives that is both un-needed and un-wanted by large droves of the population. Although she claims on the BBC that the plans are “common-sensical” and that 6/10 people agree that blocks are needed on certain parts of the internet you have to wonder who they are asking these questions too? Asking hard-line conservative groups I would imagine that they agreed with the filter, ask those working in the adult film industry and methinks that the blocks might be less well received.

Then there is the issue of what truly is offensive to children, and most importantly who is going to decide the things that most corrupt our little darlings? Are we going to block homosexual pornography from the internet? Sodomy? Inter-racial? BBW? Fetish? (I worry that readers might be getting a little too much information about my private time in this blog, but I promise you that this was all in the name of research) Questions that you think might be obvious from a liberal standpoint, but there will be various pressure groups attempting to lobby for what they find offensive to be included behind the filter.

So you’ve finally stopped us looking at naked flesh on the internet and have proven that the filter works, but where will it stop? Will we see unsavoury political websites blocked? Justin Beiber tribute pages? This blog? All offensive to some, I’m sure, but not to all. Before you think it’s ludicrous to suggest that this could happen in the UK there are already some phone service providers who have blocked the BNP website from their mobile web-service. Although a racist and contemptuous organization they are part of the British political system and have just as much right to a presence on the web as any other organization (This will be the last time I hope that I have to stand up for the BNP – stop making me!)

These ideas are another example of the government dealing with the symptoms, not the illness. Children are naturally inquisitive beings, inquisitiveness and the internet make for a dangerous combination I agree; you only have to look at my own search engine to see that I have a various points in my life ended up on the ‘weird’ part of Youtube and regret it more and more each time. However, to stifle their inquisitiveness would be wrong. It is up to parents, teachers and community leaders to ensure that children are safe when browsing the web and helping the child interpret what they see and hear. Blocks are not the answer, adequate parenting is. It seems that the right not only doesn’t trust children, but doesn’t trust parents either.

Britain is leading the way on campaigns for a free internet. However, the current proposed reforms are being praised by China, not a nation known for its tolerance of free speech, showing the absurdities of current attitudes to the World Wide Web that certain sections of this country have. Simply putting up a filter to stop the children seeing what you don’t want them too is not the answer. It’s a-kin to stuffing your fingers in your ears and screaming to drown out the sound of a falling atom bomb, it’s still going to blow up in your face – so you might as well know that it’s coming.