According to The Telegraph, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are currently meeting with the European Commission to discuss child internet safety and the topical issue of what kind of 'pornography filter' would work best.
ISPs have long been in talks with the British Government over the issue: recently a 10-week consultation on the plans for parental controls and network filtering was launched by Government ministers at a conference organised by the UK Council for Child Internet Safety (UKCCIS).
Whilst it's really good to see parents being consulted, it was rather embarrassing that the project immediately shot itself in the foot with an privacy leak which allowed visitors to view the names, email addresses, passwords and consultation responses of others, and had to be halted . (They should have asked a teenager to set it up obviously).
So far it seems that opinion is divided into two camps on the issue of enabling parents to block sites of a sexual nature (as well as gambling sites, or forums glorifying suicide and self-harm).
There are those in favour of ...
Active Choice
David Cameron, the ISPs and Google are in favour of the 'active-choice' option. The major British ISPs (BT, TalkTalk, Virgin Media and Sky) have in fact already signed up to a new code of practice which forces all new customers to choose what safety filters they want when when they buy a new computer or smartphone or sign up for broadband. David Cameron is said to support the slightly sturdier 'Active Choice Plus' version of the system, where some of the categories considered more harmful are pre-ticked: a customer would have to consciously untick them.
.. and those who would prefer ...
Opt-in
On the other hand, a report by MPs has called for a full 'opt-in' service in which such sites are blocked unless the (over 18 year old) contract-holder has specifically requested them: call this the 'hotel adult channel' approach if you like. This stance is supported by concerned charities such as the NSPCC and Reg Bailey, Chief Executive of The Mother's Union. As you could expect, this proposal is being vociferously contested by the civil liberties lobby.
So far legislation has been avoided, but there are indications from Ministers that unless progress is speeded up, it may be time for regulation.So, what are the arguments for and against each method? I'll try to precis what I have gathered:
For Active Choice (and against Opt-in)
- A much finer grading of choices and wider filtering options: parents can choose to block social networking sites or IMs as well as pornography for example.
- Because no automatic filtering can be 100% effective, there is the fear that a blanket filter would lull parents into a false sense of security. Active Choice, it is felt, would keep parents more involved and likely to talk to their children about online viewing and behaviour.
Against Active Choice (and for Opt-in)
- It is complex: parents may fail to understand the level of choices or the technology. It is important also to consider those for whom English is not their first language.
- The Active Choice filters are said to be easy to turn off by any averagely smart teenage digital native. Indeed, it may well be the children who required to install the boxes in the first place ....
- Of the ISPs, so far only TalkTalk (and yesterday, Claranet) has launched a filter which blocks content at the network level - and thus for all a family's devices. Claranet claims that it can filter "Internet chat, video calls, file-sharing and social networking; not just basic websites"
- Active Choice options are being presented only to new customers. Existing customers of an ISP or those only changing their existing service will not be offered these options.
Against Network filters in general
- No filters are completely effective: 'proxy' websites are constantly being created to bypass filters and provide links to adult and harmful content.
- The blocking at network level is only effective when mobile devices are being used at home. Once outside the family internet connection, network filters are off.
- Blocking by device (i.e. not at the network level) gives you a much greater granularity of control.
- Network level filters inevitably underblock or overblock: it's not an exact science. Households will find themselves continually inconvenienced by the 'decisions' the ISP has taken on their behalf about what is and what is not acceptable content.
- Blocking sites for pornographic content uses the same technology as any other censorship. The system has the potential for mis-use.
Have I got that about right? Any other arguments I've missed? Let me know in comments.
We'd like to know if our readers' opinions will reflect the UK Government's findings. Which of the three options on the table at the moment, would you opt for? Active Choice, Active Choice Plus, Opt-in - or none at all? We're running a poll over on the eModeration Facebook page at the moment: even if you're not a Brit, come and add your vote. What would you want in yourhousehold?