Another Problem with UK's 'Nudge Censorship': No Clear Accountability
from the thinking-it-through dept
As Tim Cushing has noted, David Cameron's half-baked plan to make online pornography opt-in in the UK has continued to earn him ridicule around the world. Despite that fact, there is already talk about extending this censorship approach to a host of other completely legal areas. The UK Open Rights Group (ORG), which discovered that slide into general censorship, not just of porn, has published another post which points out a further reason why what they call "nudge censorship" -- using default blocks that require a conscious opt-in to remove -- is so dangerous: the lack of clear accountability:
DCMS [the UK government's Department for Culture, Media and Sport] and [crusading MP Claire] Perry have been pushing both network filtering and 'nudge censorship' onto ISPs. ISPs have agreed; now those of us who think government has got it wrong have nobody clear to pressurise.
Because there will be no legislation that specifies how all these blocks are to be imposed, or on what, the public seems to have no recourse for when things go wrong -- as is bound to happen. In particular, ORG asks the following questions about the current vague and unworkable plans:
1. Are ISPs responsible for incorrect blocks?
The debate will doubtless continue, but ORG's analysis does highlight one thing: the danger of moving to "voluntary" schemes for tackling difficult problems in the online world, rather than crafting new legislation, since they offer little in the way of formal debate or checks and balances.
2. Are ISPs financially liable for incorrect blocks?
3. What happens when government suggests that 'terrorist content' be blocked with not 'opt out'?
4. Are ISPs responsible for adopting the nonsense 'preselected censorship' policy -- as it is not official government policy, but apparently the personal position of Claire Perry and DCMS heads such as Maria Miller?
5. Will Claire Perry continue to have a personal veto on the nature of broadband set up screens?
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: authority, censorship, free speech, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
UK citizens
The bluff is so lazy and blatant that it's showing how much contempt Cameron has for the UK citizens intelligence and freedom.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This nonsense will move on regardless of how much opposition it amasses or flaws that are pointed because that's how politics work nowadays. It either works for interests or it works for itself to get votes.
VPNs will be mandatory in the UK it seems. And in a disturbing quantity of other countries.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: UK citizens
As for horny teenagers, well.. better watch it than do it (with someone else), right?
Kids? Watch for your f**** kids yourselves! Parenting require devotion and attention. Don't blame others for you being a lousy parent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: UK citizens
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Im Confused
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scary...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Im Confused
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Im Confused
And that's the problem. The internet cannot be made safe for children without destroying the aspects of it that make it the most useful.
It's more like a city. If you wouldn't let your child wander alone through the city streets, you shouldn't let your child be on internet without supervision. The solution isn't to make every city street child-proof.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Im Confused
That's a really good analogy of this situation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Im Confused
Yeah, because a government knows exactly what children should and shouldnt see ...
it#s not like they could give parents (who actually should know their childs ant their cerebral maturity, or not bother having children at all) SUGGESTIONS instead of demanding that you have to be at least 567648000 seconds old to watch/hear/see/experience something.
But of course its much easier to pick some idiots from the street call them BBFC/USK/ESBR etc. and let them decide what is appropriate for the children or even adults of an entire nation
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Syntax ?
I think the "is" needs to be removed ? o_O
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Im Confused
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Scary...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Scary...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Syntax ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing
[ link to this | view in thread ]