Demonstrating "a load of cock" to censorship-crazed UK MP Claire Perry


The British Government is determined to be seen to be doing something (anything, really) about pornography online. The current incarnation of "something must be done; there, we did something!" is based on blaming "Internet companies" for not doing enough to prevent children from seeing porn, and demanding an expansion of the existing program of blocking a secret and unaccountable blacklists.

They're monumentally unsympathetic to the argument that these lists don't work ("something must be done; we are doing something"), and even less interested in the fact that these lists end up catching stuff that isn't porn. The Conservative MP Claire Perry said that overblocking is "a load of cock."

What sort of cock is in that load, though? Jim from the Open Rights Group writes, "After UK MP Claire Perry helpfully described problems with blocking as a load of cock the Open Rights Group have listed some recent blocking reports, including, startlingly, YouTube on Orange. These sites are blocked by 'default' and users may need take a passport to their mobile shop and ask to have the 'porn' switched on in order to read the Jargon File or watch YouTube."

Jargon File blocked by O2, YouTube by Orange (Thanks, Jim!)

(Image: Cocks, a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike (2.0) image from 18261299@N00's photostream)

12

  1. The opposition, rather than the government are currently the strongest proponents of this type of censorship. There is however a general shortage of MPs who have any understanding of the issues, let alone the technologies and the possible solutions.

    1.  Labour is currently by far the most authoritarian party – as they were when they were in government.  And, bizarrely, the undemocratic House of Lords is the best protector of civil liberties we have at the moment.

    2. “possible solutions.”

      Possible solutions? How about ‘leave that load of cock alone, because it’s none of your cocking business’ for a solution?

      1.  Possible solutions are all under one subset “in control of parents” – but solutions also need to deal with the concept of “age-appropriate” because that is in no way the same as “no porn”.

  2. Because it’s hard to understand, and the police will say hard to defeat, and the IT people will say expensive to do, the politicians, in the absence of any useful method, will simply play theatre to the masses.

  3. Actually I think YouTube being blocked by this filter is a very good thing for two reasons: 1) It means that the fact there is a filter is extremely visible and 2) the request to remove the filter won’t be embarrassing: “Hello BT, I’d like to be able to view YouTube please”.

  4. Overblocking a load of cock? It’s a load of smuggled budgies on O2, where a regular swimwear site was blocked until I got the grownup mode enabled. 

  5. This from some who’d rent their own children’s organs for re-election money… BULL SHIT.

Comments are closed.