So it begins...
UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
11–20 of 59 posts
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#12And so it has begin, the great firewall of the UK
Except it hasn't. The title is making stuff up based on bluster during prime ministers questions that have as much to do with actual, real policy as claims made on the campaign trail.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#13Important note for readers from the US: while the UK has a legal right to free speech (via the Human Rights Act, which in turn is based on the EU Convention on Human Rights), it is diluted by opt-out provisions for public health and safety, and undermined by other laws: notably the Obscene Publications Act (1958) -- although enforcement of the OPA against works of written fiction has collapsed in the past two decades…
Barring a jarring alteration of the existing trajectory, the US will soon have just as watered down free speech rights.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#14I instinctively reached for the 'share' button. Glad I read TFA just before I shared this, because there is no way the source says that Cameron's Net Nanny is being used to block extremist sites. All it says is that extremist sites have been taken down. That's not good, nor is it necessarily better, but let's at least be accurate, rather than try to spin this.
Cameron specifically says "blocking online sites." While he doesn't mention the technical specifics of how that will be done, the traditional way of achieving this in the UK is through the filters originally put in place for blocking websites associated with child abuse.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#15Speaking out against this initiative shows that you are an extremist who should be blocked.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#16Caution: Slippery slope
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#17I instinctively reached for the 'share' button. Glad I read TFA just before I shared this, because there is no way the source says that Cameron's Net Nanny is being used to block extremist sites. All it says is that extremist sites have been taken down. That's not good, nor is it necessarily better, but let's at least be accurate, rather than try to spin this.
Cameron specifically says "blocking online sites." While he doesn't mention the technical specifics of how that will be done, the traditional way of achieving this in the UK is through the filters originally put in place for blocking websites associated with child abuse.
> While he doesn't mention the technical specifics of how that was done
He has not claimed any sites have been blocked. Nor is he exactly famed for his technical accuracy. See the discussions about the porn filter, where the entire opt-in/opt-out thing was a massive farce from one end to the other, as they decided to blatantly misrepresent the whole thing as worse than what they'd actually agreed with the ISPs.
In this case he answered a question in prime ministers questions in an non-specific ways that leaves him free to do nothing. Or he could do as the title claims. But as it stands, the title is completely made up.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#18Important note for readers from the US: while the UK has a legal right to free speech (via the Human Rights Act, which in turn is based on the EU Convention on Human Rights), it is diluted by opt-out provisions for public health and safety, and undermined by other laws: notably the Obscene Publications Act (1958) -- although enforcement of the OPA against works of written fiction has collapsed in the past two decades…
I wonder, how powerful is the 1st amendment in the US exactly? How does it deal with situations like libel, bullying, calls to murder etc... ?
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#19Important note for readers from the US: while the UK has a legal right to free speech (via the Human Rights Act, which in turn is based on the EU Convention on Human Rights), it is diluted by opt-out provisions for public health and safety, and undermined by other laws: notably the Obscene Publications Act (1958) -- although enforcement of the OPA against works of written fiction has collapsed in the past two decades…
Barring a jarring alteration of the existing trajectory, the US will soon have just as watered down free speech rights.
Not sure that this is true. The Supreme Court in recent years has smacked down several regulations on free speech grounds in surprising ways. Campaign finance reform (aka "Citizens United") isn't a popular one on the left, but it's an example of deferring to the first amendment even when regulation has good intentions. Another case was the FDA regulation of off label marketing of prescription drugs. The crux was that you can't tell certain people (sales reps) that they aren't allowed to talk to other people (doctors) about objective facts.
Re: UK porn filter to also block "extremist narrative"?
#20...and the definition of "extremist" is defined by...? (And of course, it will eventually include "anyone opposed to the Great Firewall of Chi^H^H^H^H Britain, as its own continued existence becomes the main purpose of such tools)
This may provide some context: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020382/You-entering... (apologies for linking to dailymail, I couldn't find a better article about it).
With events like this you can understand where the ideas of blocking extremism come from.