David Cameron urges internet firms to block child abuse images

I still think we should ban MP's.

Honestly Dave is a ******* **** head.

During a meeting with Mr Cameron at Downing Street, reported in the Sun newspaper, Paul Jones, the father of murdered schoolgirl April, said: "Why can't they take this stuff off the internet? Kids are getting killed, abused, raped and messed up for the rest of their lives.

"What's their excuse? I think it is money. They have the technology and they can do this."
Click to expand...

This bit got me, yes it's tragic he lost a child, and you would forever be tormented by this, but seriously you think it's down to money? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Cameron waving to the masses.


E36cJY4.jpg.png
 
The problem with this one more so I suspect is people not opposing this.

There is still, some taboo surrounding watching pornography, and, as such, people are less willing to speak out and say don't take our porn from us.

That said, I still think it's incredibly hard to put in working filters. Where is the line drawn? Frequently at school by the time we were doing SexEd the teachers had to get the filters off so they could give us SexEd, or even lessons on male/female anatomy.

I also doubt in some ways Google/Bing will pay any attention if they say 'stop results for this search'...

Mumsnet will think this is fantastic I suspect. Other mothers will be afraid of opposing it in case they're seen as 'bad parents' and I suspect fathers may be in a tough spot too, although all in general agreement about not wanting it banned.

kd
 
David Cameron and his mumsnet buddies need to get a lesson on how the internet works. I find it incredibly frustrating that they think this is going to work.
 
To be devils advocate for a moment, why should the internet be immune to government interference when our other media channels aren't? TV and Films are both either censored or classified, with have age ratings on games, watersheds on TV etc.
 
While obviously I'm not against googling blocking the search term, it's really stupid way to approach it. I really doubt people who are looking for that google search it.
 
RDM said:
To be devils advocate for a moment, why should the internet be immune to government interference when our other media channels aren't? TV and Films are both either censored or classified, with have age ratings on games, watersheds on TV etc.
Click to expand...
"You must be over 18 to view this content, click yes to continue or no to cancel" - :D
 
RDM said:
To be devils advocate for a moment, why should the internet be immune to government interference when our other media channels aren't? TV and Films are both either censored or classified, with have age ratings on games, watersheds on TV etc.
Click to expand...

Because you can be specific with what your are censoring with other media, not with the internet.
 
RDM said:
To be devils advocate for a moment, why should the internet be immune to government interference when our other media channels aren't? TV and Films are both either censored or classified, with have age ratings on games, watersheds on TV etc.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is the the fact the government is interfering with the internet that people object too, it has done this for some time already but more the nature of this interference. It is essentially removing access to something that is not illegal merely age restricted and only allowing access should the person essentially sign up to a "perves list" Following this logic would the government in turn block netflix for showing 18 movies where actual illegal activities are carried out? Ofcourse they wont hence the outcry citing double standards.
 
Now might be the time to buy shares in a mobile phone company which does smart-phones with a reasonably priced "all you can eat" data-plan.... :D
 
elmarko said:
Now might be the time to buy shares in a mobile phone company which does smart-phones with a reasonably priced "all you can eat" data-plan.... :D
Click to expand...

I dunno about other service providers, but with O2 you already have to "opt-in" to receive adult content via their data network. They charge you £1 via the chargeable text mechanism and refund it in your next bill, so it does appear on your statement. Interestingly the sky hasn't fallen in because O2 do this.
 
elmarko said:
Now might be the time to buy shares in a mobile phone company which does smart-phones with a reasonably priced "all you can eat" data-plan.... :D
Click to expand...

Surely they'll all get wrapped up in this too? That being said don't most of these already filter out adult sites by default unless you turn off the filter?
 
Isn't this the same which mobile phone providers do? I have been on o2 and EE, to access adult material you need to verify through a credit card or call them up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom