Stop U.K Internet Censorship of pornography
  • Petitioned David Cameron

This petition was delivered to:

Conservative Party
David Cameron

Stop U.K Internet Censorship of pornography

    1. Petition by

      Anonymous

By the end of 2013, all Internet Service Providers (ISP's) will put a filter on their customers' internet access, meaning internet pornography will not be available without opt-ing out over the phone. Anonymous believes this to be the first step in removing our internet freedom.

 

A quote from HM Government e-petitions:

"The government is currently trying to push a bill forcing ISPs to provide opt-out pornography filtering, however this is an issue that fails to address any real problems.

Bad parenting is the real problem, and bad parents will simply allow the filter to be enabled and believe it protects their children, even though the filters are easily (even trivially) circumvented. Parents need to supervise and educate their children about internet use, not rely on filters of dubious effectiveness.

It also sets a poor precedent that objectionable content can be blocked at the ISP level in the name of protecting children, who are in fact being harmed more by poor parenting. Aside from content of a clearly illegal nature the government should not be forcing the presence of filters at all, but instead pushing to improve the involvement of parents in a child's life, and to promote education over flimsy, disruptive, and money-wasting "solutions"."

To:
David Cameron, Conservative Party
It should be the responsibility of the parent to warn their children about the dangers of the internet, and use a parental control program to control what content they view on the internet. Anonymous thinks that automatically opt-ing in to the use of ISP filters is unnecessary and unwanted.

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Recent signatures

    News

    1. Reached 2,500 signatures

    Supporters

    Reasons for signing

    • jordan levett LOWESTOFT, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 8 months ago

      It a disgrace that any member of the uk government should think that censorship in any way shape of form is acceptable! There will be dire consequences if our government continues with this course of action!!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Hayden Howdle NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 8 months ago

      To me, this is simple a facade by the UK goverment to block internet-related entities that the goverment cannot control or dislikes. I don't remember individual parenting becoming the job of law and the UK government, and should be down to the individual parent to setup proper parental filters themselves. There is also the issue with the fact that I feel by opting out I am putting myself on a list of potential people who will misuse the internet, and should be watched. Just because something I am entitled to by right to view is being blocked. Pornography is a legitimate business and however some people may view it, they shouldn't have the power to remove access from other people to view it when it isn't deemed illegal. I also believe that this is heavily swayed by governmental tie's with the Church of England and the personal religious beliefs. This is not right and I am strong against region being given any influence on politics directly or indirectly.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Michael Goodwin SWANSEA, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 9 months ago

      Internet censorship? No thanks, I don't fancy having to use a proxy every time I browse the web, in fact these fucking idiots don't realise that to a slightly educated individual, I can use numerous means of getting around such "filters"

      Either way, I'm paying for my fucking Internet so don't start cutting down what I can bloody look at.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Ann Close SHEFFIELD, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 9 months ago

      Stop it.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Katie Herron BALLYCLARE, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 9 months ago

      Because the filters are nothing. They aren't protecting the children. They are, if anything, harming the children. They aren't blocking just porn but they are blocking anything sexual, violent or even just file-sharing related. Sky recently have unleashed their Sky Broadband Shield. This is on the '13 years old and above' by default. In this setting many sites are blocked for no reason. 'TorrentFreak' is one of these sites. TorrentFreak is a news websites for all things copyright, file-sharing and news of censorship. I don't see how this site is a 'threat' to children. The initial porn filters have grown to cover a wide variety of other sites that aren't in any way dangerous to children. There's also the controversy that the ISPs are blocking Sex Education sites. This is after all the scandal about how the country should teach its children more about sex safety and education. How is THIS harming the children, tell me that. Then there's the notion that there is a wide variety of ages living under the same roof. Say there's a family with an age range of say 2 years old - 80 years old. This is a wide range it could be Granny, Mummy, Daddy, Older Brother in late teens early 20s and little sister of about say, for example, 5 years old. This is all very possible. Why should everyone living in that household have to live with internet restrictions just because of a 2 years old or even just a young teenager. Yes, you can opt out of the filters but it's on by default. It's a very strong symbol that's being sent out all over the internet, all around the world. It's saying that censorship is coming and that we should be running because our freedom is being stolen from us. The government don't really understand the internet, if anything the younger generation know the most as they are the ones growing up with it. There are still people out there that believe that 'pc's are for spreadsheets'. I'm not saying that everyone in the older generation doesn't understand the internet but it's not the same as growing up with it. And when I say younger generation I'm referring to Teens and Young Adults. For older generation I'm not referring to people who are 'old' but people who just outside the range of the internet generation. Then there's the fact that if parents REALLY wanted to stop their children from going on what THEY deem as inappropriate sites, the parents could just purchase one of the many nanny programs for the internet. Simple, easy to set up and does the job that YOU want done. When the filters were first announced I initially thought that David Cameron just wanted a nanny program for free but then it struck me that's he's doing it to appeal to the older generation. It's to paint the picture that he's this godsend that's been send to protect the children's eyes from all these awful things on the internet. They shouldn't let the government determine what it inappropriate and what isn't because as many people know, they just aren't capable. In the end it's personal opinion what is inappropriate but the fact the government believe that they have the right to chose that. There isn't a need for the filter and if anything parents should be able to monitor their children efficiently already. If not then it is just the case of bad parenting. Overall there has been a lot of discussion about parenting techniques over the past few months. Parenting is becoming harder and harder because of what people now consider 'violent'. I'm not directly referring to actual contact violence because that's wrong but doesn't everyone remember when you'd get a whack around the ear when you stepped out of line. Am I the only one that's, in a strange way, grateful of that? It put me in line, it's what has disciplined me and made me who I am today. I'm not a parent so I'm not the one to come to for parenting advice but just from general experience with the young children of these years, they're a little spoilt. What if the 'naughty corner' stops working? What happens when the child relizes that your threats are empty, that you actually have no power to stop them from wrecking havoc. I know that this has gone of topic but at the end of it all this is what it's about. It's about David Cameron who's trying to paint a good picture of UK and parenting. He's also elbowing the pirates of the world, just by saying that he has the power to restrict the internet. However, his lack of experience in the internet shows his absolute incompetence for knowledge of the internet. Everyone knows that anybody can get through the blocks. When something is blocked another one just pops up, it's like the circle of life but in the internet. Mr. Cameron is doing what he's told he's being a good boy but at the sacrifice of an uneducated country as parents are unable to see the damage that these filters bring. They'll just think that it'll be completely safe is only protecting them. Only that it isn't. There's a difference between UK and USA and it's this. The USA would fight against this and everyone knows it. This is why it's important to me, it's because I don't want it to get worse to grow and spread like disease. It'll make other countries play their hand and get in on the filters. It's not just harming the children, it's about a little game called politics, it's about the UK and David Cameron's image and how it's showcased to the world and it's of course about pirates and about copyright and file-sharing and all sorts of other stuff. I don't believe that he's thought this through and might come to regret the impact it'll have on our country, our younger generation, our parenting and how the filters will effect the world.

      Ok, I haven't proofread the above mess but it's certainly very long and probably doesn't make much sense but I hope that I get my point across about why this matter is important to me, my family and to the rest of the world.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:

    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.