UK "default on" ISP censoring will include "web forums" by default

Just wrote to my MP

Dear Emily Thornberry,

I am writing to you as I am concerned about the government's proposal to filter out adult content on the internet by means of censorship at ISP level. If the intended purpose is indeed to protect children then why is the filtering not being presented as an optional service? Surely as an adult I am free to decide what constitutes appropriate content?

I am also given to understand that the filters could extend far beyond pornographic and adult content and could potentially include a broad range of categories such as internet forums, smoking and "esoteric materials". This is already a very wide and over-reaching set of filters but what is stop them from being added to? Who will be responsible for overseeing and managing the list of blacklisted content?

To put it simply, I do not believe that in a democratic country such as ours that we should allow the internet to be censored in any way shape or form.

I would be very grateful if you would take the time to give me your opinion on this matter.

Yours sincerely,
Clockwork_killa

I stole Bothwells starting line and rambled a bit in the middle:

Dear Heidi Alexander,

I'm writing to you, as my MP, to voice my concern over the upcoming "Porn Censorship" bill, introduced by David Cameron this week.

Putting aside the generally distasteful nature of any mass censorship, Mr Cameron and his coalition appear to be using child pornography as an excuse to seriously restrict or outright block the availability of many other kinds of content online. The Open Rights Group have published a report (https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/sleepwalking-into-censorship) which shows what internet service providers are being asked to censor. It encompasses a wide range of material, other than pornography, such as:

Anorexia and eating disorder websites
Suicide related websites
Alcohol
Smoking
Web forums
Esoteric material
Web blocking circumvention tools

The first four on the list could quite easily encompass sites which help people gain an understanding of the issues or seek help from peers. The last three are even more worrying. Web Forums covers a vast range of digital communication tools used by millions of people to communicate (freely!) online. Mumsnet is an obvious example of this type of site. Forums help fuel healthy discussions, provide places for communities to congregate and often keep special interest subjects alive which would otherwise have perished. This brings me onto Esoteric Material, which is an astounding addition. Surely the internet is at its best, allowing groups of people with specialist interests, the opportunity to communicate with one and other across geographies. The vague nature of this particular addition also leaves it open to dangerous interpretation. Finally, web blocking circumvention tools could relate to a vast number of services offered on the web to allow people to remain anonymous. This breach of freedom could severely limit the ability of people to share information of a sensitive nature and remain safe. Web blocking circumvention tools are the key tool currently allowing people, repressed by a dictatorship, to communicate with the outside world, in Syria. Bearing in mind the mass condemnation of the current regime, i find the move to copy their restriction of digital content astounding.

I hope that you, too, find this bill extremely worrying both in its underhand presentation, "in the name of the children", to the country and its wide ranging goals of censorship. I also hope that you feel strongly enough to raise this issue, along with many of your colleagues, in parliament as the government seems determined to to implement this regardless of the implications.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,
Soul

Read your tweets on this d.k.
Stupidity of highest order.

Read your tweets on this d.k.
Stupidity of highest order.

I'm pretty sure it won't get through, it's fairly out there on the stupid things that politicians say they'll do.

But I can't believe it's even got as far as it has. Utterly bonkers stuff.

I wouldn't worry too much.

Once the government realise that Scoble will no longer be restricted to his bedroom, and will spend more time outside on the streets, they'll sack it off.

I stole Bothwells starting line and rambled a bit in the middle:

Pinched and sent to the lovely Oliver Letwin....who I've already recently been badgering about cycling matters.....he told me he cycles in London, so no nasty comments tho incase he's 'on here'.

My wife will be pleased...

For once.

Pinched and sent to the lovely Oliver Letwin....who I've already recently been badgering about cycling matters.....he told me he cycles in London, so no nasty comments tho incase he's 'on here'.

I was also recently bugging my MP about the space for cyclists. Don't think I've ever been this active.

What space for cyclists?
New bike cafe? Velodrome?

From what I've been reading, a few other countries within Europe have this system implemented. There was a great post on Reddit which I can't seem to find to suggest that this is a growing (and failing) trend.
I find it hilariously ironic that some friends who used to begrudge the concept of privacy with their eternal slogan of "I ain't go nothing to hide" suddenly feel so uncomfortable with this level of censorship since your name could end up on a virtual list (which let's be honest, WILL get hacked and leaked) and are not in its favour.
This is one of many steps down the Censorship rabbit hole. Anyone seen how Talk Talk got complimented by Cameron as a leader in implementing filters? Have you seen their list? Porn leads to extreme political thought/opinion which leads to extreme opinion, which finally could lead to simple opinion censorship.
Oh wait....Forums...the nesting grounds for opinions!!
I'm just unhappy that these filters might hinder the buffering speed of my porn!

Wrote to mine. Attached some porn for effect.

Dear Diane Abbott,

It's been a while since I last contacted you. You may recall your cycle training session with our company CTUK. We are a bikeability scheme and use a forum (http://www.tabs.microcosm.app/) to discuss cycle training issues.

We understand that "web forums" are going to be included in default-on preferences. Why does the proposed filter of child porn has such wide reach so as to effect access to sites like ours? I'm sure you will not support such broad censorship with is clearly undemocratic.

While we appreciate that this is about protecting children. Currently possessing child porn is already illegal,and that the filter isn't going to stop paedophiles who will just work around it, but the filter does have broad and over-reaching impact on the average citizen many of whom use web forums to discuss issues and topics relevant to people with a common interest. I understand that even mumsnet would be effected. Please oppose this bill
Yours sincerely,

skydancer

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/cameron-stop-sleepwalking

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-stop-u-k-internet-censorship-of-pornography

Take your pick... though I think calling it censorship makes it too easy to shrug off (the argument would be "just turn the filter off"). It's more the casual erosion of an open default I don't like.

Also these:

How big is online porn?

Google and Child Porn-Related Search Engine Traffic.

tl;dr There's not as much porn as you thought, and very little of it is kiddy related.

David Cameron seems to be tripping over the stuff though.. something he's not telling us? #dirtypoliticians

David Cameron seems to be tripping over the stuff though.. something he's not telling us? #dirtypoliticians

He is telling us

We're all in this together

Very scary. Hmm need to find VPN tunnel to Russia I guess

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/cameron-stop-sleepwalking

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-stop-u-k-internet-censorship-of-pornography

Take your pick... though I think calling it censorship makes it too easy to shrug off (the argument would be "just turn the filter off"). It's more the casual erosion of an open default I don't like.

Balls! Damn right you shouldn't It's the same argument used as surveillance "I don't care if I'm spied on, I've got nothing to hide" is always uttered by the people who install cameras and censored lights outside their house.
EVERYONE has something to hide. EVERYONE deserves so sort of privacy. Being on virtual lists only fuels the paranoia that comes with the legislation to begin with.

I honestly get the feeling it's too late. Not that I'm saying don't try, but your average person who just hears stuff on TV will vote this through no problems.

oh and I'm dead against it. All sorts of things go wrong, for example www.theaveragegamer.com which I sort of write for, well a lot of web filtering software classify it as 'porn'. sigh We've tried to get it changed but it's impossible, never get any response etc...

I honestly get the feeling it's too late. Not that I'm saying don't try, but your average person who just hears stuff on TV will vote this through no problems.

Failure in Journalism? Paid off media?
It's got fuck all to do with Porn. Oh wait...its child porn apparently. Do people REALLY think that that kinda of shit is just going to be floating on google images? You have to dig, and deep; just like anything frowned upon online.
There's a cultural trend which seems to berate the rest of society on the self centered failures of parents.
Shit, when I heard the word "fuck" for the first time, I did everything in my power to know what it meant.
Likewise, my little sister now Knows how to go Proxy online. She's 11.
A thief wants your bike? There's always a means to get it.

"I don't care if I'm spied on, I've got nothing to hide" is always uttered by the people who install cameras and censored lights outside their house.

From my social circle, over the course of a lifetime, I've only known one guy who said this a lot and he was vehement and insistent about it at all times.

He went to prison a couple of years ago for making and distributing child pornography, ironically enough.

^ Anyone on here?

Will be writing to my MP when I'm back at my putah... Crazy business...

You might wish to emphasise that possessing child porn is already illegal

This has never yet stopped any of the Governments from pushing through legislation that will get them media soundbites and approval from the uniformed public. It didn't stop samurai swords or violent pornographic images being banned to use two recent examples despite the fact that there was existing legislation that was already more than effective.