Every morning, one of the first tasks of the Shropshire Star’s mighty internet team is to erase the spam emails caught overnight - you know the sort of thing, writes blogger Andrew Owen.
Our spam filters catch all sorts of submitted links to ‘grown-up’ websites, and they all have one thing in common - you wouldn’t want to show them to your grandmother. Or your mother. Or, for that matter, to yourself.
Let’s be honest, there are things on this here internet machine thingamibobbins that you are much better off not seeing. Things you simply do not want floating about in your head. Things that will deprave, corrupt and leave you feeling thoroughly depressed about your fellow man and his ability to exploit and demean in order to make a few quid.
And so it is with interest that we learn today of an idea to give websites a film-style ratings system.
Our good friend Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, tells a national newspaper that the Government is looking at a number of possible internet safeguards.
Some content, such as clips of beheadings, is “unacceptable”, he says (and it’s nice of him to point that out).
“Leaving your child for two hours completely unregulated on the internet is not something you can do,” he adds.
Personally I agree with him on this one (as I’m sure he’ll be delighted to learn). The issue is not about curbing free speech but about the public interest. If the internet gives us unrestricted access into the darker parts of our souls does that make us a better society? I think not.
Still, I wonder if it will work. The trouble with ratings is that kids will always want to see the thing they are not supposed to see. When I was 12 part of the thrill of watching Rambo on video was the fact that at the age of 12 you were not supposed to be watching Rambo on video. (And you still shouldn’t: it’s rubbish.)
The trouble is that we are too easily exposed to horrors these days. I find it amazing that nasty torture porn films such as Hostel get an 18-certificate at the cinema, but then get released on DVD with extra gore and torture added. (Seriously, who actually buys this stuff?) And then they get shown on the TV, where children can watch from the comfort of their own bedrooms. Nice!
A wise philosopher (or was it Master Splinter in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?) once said that with great power comes great responsibility. Very true. Broadcasters and internet providers should take full responsibility for what they put out. Perhaps if we all exercised a bit more responsibility over our actions society would be a better place.
Anyway, that’s today’s sermon over. Now follow this link here, kids. It’ll make your hair curl!
8 Comments
I agree with everything you say, a very good idea, with the usual squeals of anguish from those who have a vested interest in this type of thing. The only thing that I could possibly object to is calling Andy Burnham, “a friend” - he may be yours, he is certainly not mine. If he was consistent in his concerns for our well-being and culture then maybe, but this man was a prime mover in allowing 24 hour drinking, a prime mover in easing betting, gaming and lotteries and, all in all having much to do with the increase in yobbery in our society. We will wait and see if he pulls this off or if it falls by the wayside the same as so much of the guff put out by New Labour.
Report abuse
superb idea
Report abuse
Oh super, more unnecessary and superfluous legislation by people who obviously have far too much time on their hands. If Burnham is worried about what his children might encounter online, there are already net filtering services to take care of this for him.
Report abuse
prove the beheadings, because I havent found any. and the thingamigibbons are called computers!! there not primates.how are the goverment going to safegaurd the internet. Its impossible, you will need the full co-operation of worldwide Goverments and ISP’s, treatys will get signed, price of the internet will go up, and people wouldnt want to use it as it would be a little like big brother!!
Report abuse
This is a bit like blaming the road builders for bad driving.
As an internet service provider, “I” provide “you” with internet connectivity to the “outside world”.
It’s the same as if “I” were providing the “road” from your house to the motorway network (AKA the internet highway)……
I dont, and can’t control the standard of driving on “that motorway” - and likewise neither can I control the “traffic” on the internet.
As an internet service provider .. Am I really being expected to “filter” everything that “comes your way” - just so it might be something that offends?
There are plenty of safeguards that a conciencious and aware internet user can employ.
The internet is a global resource.
The only real way this can be “cleaned up”.. if that is what people really want… is not to have a “world wide web” at all…..
The major providers can just provide banks of “local webservers” (if they haven’t got them already?!) locally storing “copies” of websites that only “they” deem suitable for “you” to see …..
Roll on big brother….. Faceless organisations controlling what you see and hear …. is that want everyone wants?
Welcome to the future ….
CCTV everywhere.. ID cards…. Internet controlled…. what next?
Report abuse
Does Mr J. spend a lot of time looking for beheadings on the internet?
Report abuse
typical labour to control us all, i would have uncensored access for all
Report abuse
…And when, exactly, are people going to start taking responsibility for their own actions/decisions instead of whining and waiting for the mop-up brigade to do it for them?
You don’t like certain sites? Don’t visit them. It’s not rocket science. If you’re going to visit them, well, its your choice and on your own head be it…
The problem in society isn’t websites, films, tv, etc - its people not accepting responsibility for the things they decide to do.
Report abuse