Opt in or opt out?
Not an agency question but an ISP question coming to us soon. As if it’s not enough having Advertising Standards Authority, BBC, TV licensing, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council, MI5 and MI6 being involved in UK Internet content, the Christian charity “Mothers' Union” has managed to get legislation to limit p0rn0graphy on the Internet.
In future signing up to an ISP will involve an automatic opt out of pornographic sites unless you choose to specifically opt in. This is the tip of the iceberg.
In any event, it is already (rightly so) illegal to download extreme p0rn. Ie p0rn of a violent nature however, p0rn is often classed as nudity. I have come across this with clients using Websense where innocent photo share and online news sites are block as p0rn. Even worse, key words class sites as p0rn and again not only was a Microsoft site blocked as p0rn but also a technical blog by a Swedish lady with an unfortunate surname. By not opting to receive p0rn, what other sites will be blocked?
Why the government giving in to the concerns of the “Mothers' Union” is unknown but the “Mothers' Union” pressure group is hardly Christian. Why do they not lobby against child poverty and the killing and mistreatment of children? It seems acceptable to expose children to violence but unacceptable to expose the to natural acts between humans. If they read the bible, they would find that Jesus befriended prostitutes, drunk wine and went to parties. When Jesus was against was violence, corruption and suppression.
I strongly suggest that even if you don’t want your kids to watch p0rn, still opt in and police the Internet yourself. If not, next time it will be political websites blocked.
Not an agency question but an ISP question coming to us soon. As if it’s not enough having Advertising Standards Authority, BBC, TV licensing, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council, MI5 and MI6 being involved in UK Internet content, the Christian charity “Mothers' Union” has managed to get legislation to limit p0rn0graphy on the Internet.
In future signing up to an ISP will involve an automatic opt out of pornographic sites unless you choose to specifically opt in. This is the tip of the iceberg.
In any event, it is already (rightly so) illegal to download extreme p0rn. Ie p0rn of a violent nature however, p0rn is often classed as nudity. I have come across this with clients using Websense where innocent photo share and online news sites are block as p0rn. Even worse, key words class sites as p0rn and again not only was a Microsoft site blocked as p0rn but also a technical blog by a Swedish lady with an unfortunate surname. By not opting to receive p0rn, what other sites will be blocked?
Why the government giving in to the concerns of the “Mothers' Union” is unknown but the “Mothers' Union” pressure group is hardly Christian. Why do they not lobby against child poverty and the killing and mistreatment of children? It seems acceptable to expose children to violence but unacceptable to expose the to natural acts between humans. If they read the bible, they would find that Jesus befriended prostitutes, drunk wine and went to parties. When Jesus was against was violence, corruption and suppression.
I strongly suggest that even if you don’t want your kids to watch p0rn, still opt in and police the Internet yourself. If not, next time it will be political websites blocked.
s, but I said nothing, for I was not a 
Comment