Save The Children!

[Just-Jude]

Is David Cameron using the hysterical propaganda from childrens charities about paedophiles, in an attempt to censor and control the internet?

[naomi24]

Charities that aim to protect children are not ‘hysterical’. You, Jude, are a wind-up merchant.

[modeller]

//You, Jude, are a wind-up merchant. // That is his motive , driven by a sick mind.

[emmie]

one should be protecting children, imagine for one moment someone had taken pictures of your child or someone you know, and posted them on a website, i will never understand how they can do it, and people look for them, vile. I would be happy to see the internet having to ask people to opt in to view images, and any and all child porn deleted, taken down, and any person caught loading these images to the net and anyone viewing be prosecuted.

[jake-the-peg]

All I can say is anybody who thinks this is a good idea doesn't know what a proxy server is

[emmie]

the idea behind it is very sound, whether it's feasible is another matter. However we should do everything in our powers to protect children, be it in the home or on line

[jake-the-peg]

The idea behind it is not particularly sound - it's the idea that pornography causes behaviour changes and that's something that's been challenged many many times.

This is not something based on facts that's come out of a careful review it's an emotional thing that's designed to appeal to the electorate on an emotional level.

It's also completely infeasible - as I say it's very simple to establish a connection to a proxy server out on the internet that does queries and retrievals on your behalf.

Absolute clear cut case of distraction politics - If you cant do something effective - do what you can and tell everybody it will be effective

[emmie]

this is specific to child porn,

[mikey4444]

I was listening to some idiot woman Government spokesperson being interviewed on the Today program a few mins ago, desperately trying to deny that the agency that deal with this haven't had their budget cut.

Justin Webb gave her numerous chances to explain how they were going to implement this with a budget cut but she just kept waffling on.

[naomi24]

Jake, I somehow suspect that had this come from a Labour politician your post would have read quite differently.

[emmie]

wouldn't you want someone, anyone to do something about that, take those images off the net, jail people who peddle this trash, those who download it, come on that surely is what any normal thinking person would want.
Porn for blokes, or women may well be a totally different issue.

[jake-the-peg]

No em - this isn't party political - I work for a large multi-national computer security organisation - and frankly sometimes I dispair about the level of expertise on this issue in Government.

Actually that's not true - they have many experts - they just obviously don't listen to them when it a 'vote winner'

Actually em - they were talking about Child Pornography last week - controls on the web for that are very strong and active already.

This latest initiative is about pornography in general

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076

[emmie]

Cameron when interviewed was talking about child pornography, that to my mind needs addressing.

[Octavius]

It is about porn in general, and children's access to it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/cole-moreton/10107771/Claire-Perry-MP-Parents-take-back-control.html

[LazyGun]

I am baffled by the strength of feeling you are exhibiting on this issue, Jude. I have not seen any evidence that childrens charities are peddling hysterical propaganda when warning about the dangers of the internet and paedophiles.

It seems a slightly odd topic to make such a stand on. Nor is this a party political issue- all political parties are in broad agreement with each other that tougher measures need to be adopted by the service providers.

Like others here, I have some doubts about just how effective such measures might be, since the tech savvy will in all likelihood have already abandoned access methods that might be affected by such proposals, but it cannot hurt, and we already accept the need for a degree of censorship of the internet, with measures like family safe browsing etc.

The damage to the exploited and vulnerable is quantifiable and real. One of governments pre-eminent responsibilities is to do what it can to ensure the safety and security of its citizens, and it seems to me that this falls into that category.

[emmie]

surely it's about images of children being abused, those images accessible to people on the internet, who are into that sort of vile material