Official wants to introduce an international rating system for the WWW

[syciprider]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/autoNe...BrandChannel=0

Another enlightened person who thinks he knows whats good for all of you.

LONDON (Reuters) - The kind of ratings used for films could be applied to websites in a bid to better police the Internet and protect children from harmful and offensive material, Britain's minister for culture has said.

Andy Burnham told The Daily Telegraph newspaper, published on Saturday, that the government was planning to negotiate with the administration of President-elect Barack Obama to draw up new international rules for English language websites.

"The more we seek international solutions to this stuff -- the UK and the U.S. working together -- the more that an international norm will set an industry norm," the newspaper reports the Culture Secretary as saying in an interview.

Giving websites film-style ratings would be one possibility.

"This is an area that is really now coming into full focus," Burnham told the paper.

Internet service providers could also be forced to offer services where the only sites accessible are those deemed suitable for children, the paper said.

Any moves to censor the Internet would go to the heart of a debate about freedom of speech on the World Wide Web.

"If you look back at the people who created the Internet they talked very deliberately about creating a space that governments couldn't reach," Burnham told The Telegraph. "I think we are having to revisit that stuff seriously now.
He said some content should not be available to be viewed (and who appointed him to decide these things?)

"This is not a campaign against free speech, far from it; it is simply there is a wider public interest at stake when it involves harm to other people. We have got to get better at defining where the public interest lies and being clear about it."

Burnham, who has three young children, pointed to the example of a 9 p.m. television "watershed" in Britain before which certain material, like violence, cannot be broadcast, and said better controls were needed for the Internet. (and some countries severely restrict all forms of media. Should we follow their example too?)

The minister wants new industry-wide "take down times" so that websites like YouTube or Facebook would have to remove offensive or harmful content within a specified time once it is brought to their attention. (It's a good thing your authority does not extend over here)

He also said Britain was considering changing libel laws to give people access to legal help if they are defamed online.

What will ratings do that warnings on adult websites do not already provide? Imposing a rating system will merely open the door to further regulation.

[Akeris]

[username n/a]

Well this is just stupid on a whole 'nother level.

[tplyons]

So they want an internet v-chip?

Yes, I think it can be a good thing, but there's already software for that. It's up to the parent to control their children, not some international system.

[MJ5150]

Movies and music have it, so what's the big deal with the internet adopting some kind of system as well?

The internet is turning into a highly used media outlet now. The audience is much larger than I think anyone ever imagined it would be

-Mike

[tplyons]

Originally Posted by MJ5150

Movies and music have it, so what's the big deal with the internet adopting some kind of system as well?

The internet is turning into a highly used media outlet now. The audience is much larger than I think anyone ever imagined it would be

-Mike

If it's something like the V-Chip, there's a lot of stuff that can be not accessible to some people. We had problems like this in my high school, firewalls went up to block certain keywords.

The biggest problem: it sure as hell made research hard. It was difficult to learn about the social effects of drugs, Nazi-ism in World War II. Too much censorship made learning difficult until they finally loosened the firewall.

There's a way around anything, but why do we need an agency telling us what we should and should not be reading or watching? Why have an agency hindering us from learning? Why not just be responsible parents and keep a close eye on your children?

[doctorjazz]

I'm pretty sure you can make most people condone anything up to genocide if you just stamp "for the children" on it.

[bassrique]

Originally Posted by MJ5150

Movies and music have it, so what's the big deal with the internet adopting some kind of system as well?

The internet is turning into a highly used media outlet now. The audience is much larger than I think anyone ever imagined it would be

-Mike

How many CDs and films are there released? Now think how many web sites there are and how many are created every day.

Come on, it's just not practical.

[MJ5150]

Originally Posted by bassrique

How many CDs and films are there released? Now think how many web sites there are and how many are created every day.

Come on, it's just not practical.

You've got a point there. But I really don't think that is an issue for those who are wanting a system to be implemented. It may take them forever to rate every website out there, but if they make progress along the way, they'll be happy.

-Mike

[MJ5150]

Originally Posted by tplyons

The biggest problem: it sure as hell made research hard. It was difficult to learn about the social effects of drugs, Nazi-ism in World War II. Too much censorship made learning difficult until they finally loosened the firewall.

There's a way around anything, but why do we need an agency telling us what we should and should not be reading or watching? Why have an agency hindering us from learning? Why not just be responsible parents and keep a close eye on your children?

Yeah, try doing a search for "Mars exploration" on some school system computers. In many cases, that will get a red flag thrown up next to a persons logon ID, followed by a visit to the principals office.

I don't think this is in place to replace parents, more of an aid perhaps. I admire the nobleness of the idea, but it will be difficult to implement as you have already shown in just one example. No one is going to disagree that there is a disgusting level of filth and moral depravity readily available for viewing on the internet. Having people concerned about this, and trying to come up with a way to help moderate it, isn't a bad thing.

Now what you may consider filthy may not jive with someone elses interpretation. Just like you may not have a problem viewing a violent R-rated movie while someone else would. No doubt there will be ways for you to view what you choose on the internet, just like there are ways for you to view movies or listen to music that others think is disgusting.

-Mike

[burk48237]

I have no problem with the idea of a rating system, and websites should freely submit to it. That is just an expansion of freedom (more information improves freedom of choice). But the areas you had in bold print is what concerned me. As typical this goes beyond the informing area to the censorship area. The whole beauty of the internet, it I can bring it in my home when I want to. But I'm not surprised, information keeps serfdom's from governing the little serfs so easy.