UK to Require Registration to View Porn on Internet

Talk about the nanny state! From the Telegraph:

The Prime Minister is to announce that in future, every internet user in the country will be asked whether they want to have access to pornography.

A joint British and American “task force” will be created to tackle obscene websites, while Google and other search engine providers will be required to draw up a “blacklist” of the most depraved and illegal search terms, Mr Cameron will announce.

The initiatives will also include new measures to stop children accidentally stumbling across explicit but legal pornographic images in public places, according to well-placed sources. The six biggest companies providing access to wireless internet in cafés and railway stations have all signed a deal to block legal pornography where children could view it. The roll-out of “family friendly Wi-Fi” is expected to begin from the end of August.

The moves follow concern that hardcore and violent images are damaging children’s lives while access to illegal child pornography has been linked to high profile crimes…

, , , ,

  • echar

    Will there be a required registration to view violence and war in the media, to keep the kids from viewing it?

    Fucking bad‽

    Murder good‽

  • VaudeVillain

    Damn. I’d really hoped to visit the UK at some point, but no fucking way am I registering with a government agency to look at porn.

    Crazy theory: I read an article on The Economist discussing how the UK’s sex workers were feeling the pinch of economic downturn despite normally being a fairly resilient industry. Maybe this is Cameron’s way of giving a subsidy to sex workers without coming out and saying that he wants to (*ahem*) throw the whores a bone.

  • Lee Swain

    The article mentions NOTHING about registering to view pornography. It’s more a content filter implemented by the service provider that is on by default and turned off by the user with a single click.

    Quote “a requirement to un-tick a box which has been pre-set to enforce parental controls”

    Wow, Big Brother eh?

    Please stop over hyping and sensationalizing stories to fit a fear of government agenda.

  • BuzzCoastin

    just like their role model China
    except in China they block it for you
    that must be the diff between a free kuntery & a totalitarian state

  • Conspiracy Carrot

    We need the children to grow up well-adjusted & healthy so they can go fight in the endless wars waged by their corporate overlords. Don’t let these kids see some tits or they’ll just wanna fuck all day and not blast third-worlder’s heads off.

  • OdinMcHaggis

    I will finally sell my old Hustler Mag stash. To some “registered sex offender” for a sweet profit.

  • ishmael2009

    About time too. The dehumanisation of women and their depiction as just sex objects for men’s pleasure has to stop. All the whining about men’s right to view pornography doesn’t disguise the damaging effect it has on their view of women.

    • Biggly

      You realize it blocks women too, right? Next, we can block romantic stories about rich, muscular men subsidizing women – and often dying for them.

  • Biggly

    Disgusting. Not the porn, the government.

  • Alan Morse Davies

    This reminds me of the 80s UK debate about VHS tapes or “Video Nasties”, also the 90s UK debate about violence in video games.

    It will do nothing and is just an empty political talking point. I would like to address the thinking that goes behind it though.

    So no porn for kids, that is now controlled. We can all breathe a sigh of relief. They won’t work out a way to circumvent that, and thank Dog, because who knows what could happen to them?

    Katie Price is still acceptable as a role model for teenage girls? Yes she is.

    I don’t see the point about objectification of women made by ishmael2009 . That’s the point of porn, it’s fantasy, I’m not even straight, I objectify men. The point of porn is to provide a perspective that appeals to you when you masturbate. The idea that you can socially engineer attitudes by modifying porn will just create bad porn that no-one wants to watch. That seems rather censorious.

    The idea that we are all incapable of understanding how fantasy differs from how we should act in reality is very Freudian, he was always scared of the masses. Something to be feared and controlled.

    If you want to socially engineer attitudes, don’t start with the entertainment, that’s the last stop not the first.

    I would suggest if you want to change the perceived problems in your culture, you start with the adults.

    A cinema full of people, how many would leave due to a graphic scene of two people having sex with nothing blanked out or left to the imagination?

    A cinema full of people, how many would leave due to a graphic scene of someone being shot multiple times and then having their corpse mutilated?

    Less people leave for the violence I think.

    Personally I like sex and hate violence.

    I also believe that all attempts to legislate against taste will ultimately fail.

    The thinking that made this initiative is patrician… “we need to save the people from themselves”.

    Is this 1890?

    Prohibition worked. Laws against homosexuality prevented gayness from “spreading”. The war on drugs has made U.S. drug use decline and caused no damage to neighbouring countries. All great successes.

    Oh but wait, it’s about the children… instant moral high ground.

    If we can focus on protecting them from the world then we don’t need to look at ourselves as part of their “problem”.