Attempts to filter the internet in other countries show the difficulties for David Cameron's plans
Filtering the internet abroad has led to censorship and increased surveillance
Wednesday 24 July 2013
Even Cameron is confused, with the PM admitting that there would be “problems down the line” with the scheme and that “soft” and written pornography would not be filtered.
Although elements of the government’s plans are reasonable (any efforts to curb the spread child abuse imagery online should be applauded) equating illegal content with legal pornography is a mistake.
Attempts by other countries to implement similar schemes show this clearly, with the introduction of internet filters commonly leading to wide-spread surveillance of citizens and even politically-motivated censorship.
Online censorship in China targeting pornography introduced the compulsory installation of ‘Green Dam’ software on all PCs sold in the country. The government said the filter was intended to protect younger generations from “unhealthy content including pornography and violence”, but the country’s ‘netizens’ suspected it would be used for increased surveillance.
Even in a society where a restricted online experience is to be expected, a survey on the popular news portal site ifeng.com reported that 75.8% of participants thought the software could 'impinge on their privacy'.
The government’s filters were also notoriously indiscriminate. Banned keywords included ‘pornography’ but also ‘touch’ and ‘play’, whilst a filtering algorithm designed detect images with a high percentage of “skin coloured” pixels ended up censoring images of animals such as pigs.
Russia has undertaken similar schemes, announcing plans in November last year to “block Internet content that it deems illegal or harmful to children”. Although some actions enacting under the new laws were applauded (the removal of a suicide-themed Facebook group for example) critics of the government suggested that the laws would be the first step towards increased political censorship.
Such fears were increased when it was revealed that the legislation also contained a small paragraph authorizing the use of what is known as DPI technology (deep packet inspection) to enforce the filters. Described as ‘CCTV for the internet’, DPI allows for in-depth surveillance of internet traffic as cheaply and efficiently as possible.
Although comparing the UK’s plans with those of autocratic regimes such as China and Russia seems disproportionate, the ways in which these countries have attempted to filter pornography and subsequently introduced greater levels of surveillance -whether inadvertently or not - demonstrates the difficulty in crafting such laws.
Even in liberal democracies such schemes have proved difficult to manage. In 2009 Australia’s Communication and Media Authority (ACMA) began trialling a ‘blacklist’ of banned URLs similar to Russia's legislation.
However, once the list was leaked it was revealed that many unoffensive sites had been flagged to be banned. These included the site for a private dentist surgery (it had once been hacked by a Russian ‘purveyor of pornography’), a kennel service, and a consultancy for school cafeterias.
The scheme was eventually scrapped but recent changes by the Australian government have led to the filtering of material described as “being used in, or in relation to, the commission of offences against the laws of the Commonwealth or of the States and Territories”.
Anti-censorship groups have criticised the wording of this legislation as being unacceptably vague, and in April this year the website of the Melbourne Free University – an organization that encourages non-partisan political activism – was banned for nine days, with the site’s ISP saying they were legally unable to “provide the details regarding who has blocked the IP or why".
If the PM's plans to filter the internet go through it seems inevitable that there will be similar infringements seen in the UK. Whilst increased funding to stop the spread of illegal imagery would receive unanimous support, Cameron's current position seems driven by political agenda as he attempts to reduce a massive complex issue to a series of soundbites. As they currently stand, the government's plans would only encourage the possibility of increased surveillance and inadvertent censorship in the UK.
Life & Style blogs
The Evil Within preview: a survival horror fan’s best worst nightmare
36-year-old skeleton of dead baby found inside Indian woman
Porn film production 'must stop in Los Angeles' after actor tests positive for HIV
Anal sex study reveals climate of 'coercion'
The science of saturated fat: A big fat surprise about nutrition?
Robin Williams Emmys tribute led by Billy Crystal criticised for including 'racist' joke about Muslim woman
Rotherham child sex abuse scandal: Labour Home Office to be probed over what Tony Blair's government knew - and when
The Rotherham child abuse scandal is a tale of apologists, misogyny and double standards
What do immigrants really think of Britain? Polish immigrant's Reddit post goes viral
Do you realise just how foolish the UK looks?
With Douglas Carswell joining Ukip, my party has taken another giant step forward
- 1 Unseen Charlie and the Chocolate Factory chapter deemed 'too subversive' released
- 2 Ebola virus: It's ripped through towns – now the deadliest ever outbreak of the virus is heading for Africa's teeming cities
- 3 Joan Rivers: 'Palestinians deserve to be dead'
- 4 A teacher speaks out: 'I'm effectively being forced out of a career that I wanted to love'
- 5 Mexican woman becomes world’s 'oldest person' at 127
iJobs Gadgets & Tech
£40000 - £45000 per annum + pension, healthcare,25 days: Ashdown Group: An est...
£18000 - £23000 per annum + Commission: SThree: Huxley Associates are currentl...
£18000 - £23000 per annum + Commission: SThree: Computer Futures are currently...
£18000 - £25000 per annum + Commission: SThree: Computer Futures are currently...