Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Lib Dem President: ‘David Cameron’s ineffective, nonsensical porn filter policy needs to be scrapped’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. atalanta 10 Jan, 11:27am

    Yes, but might Mr Fallon have made these points somewhat earlier, since it was always clear that this policy was going to lead to this kind of inappropriate censorship.

    Now that it’s in place, the chances of reversing this policy are very low. The best we are likely to get are minor changes. And as I’ve pointed out before, false positives (sites wrongly identified as porn) are an inevitable consequence of any blocking software.

    This means that internet users will continue to be cut off from important non-porn resources – as has been happening on mobile data services for years.

    And it will become, and remain, a major task for civil liberties and LGBT groups to monitor inappropriate web censorship, as the ACLU already has to do in the US.

    1. The policy hasn’t even made it to parliament, it is still a proposal. The investigations are into filters being developed in anticipation of the policy. If Lib Dems in Parliament draw a line (which is looking incredibly likely) then this stupid policy won’t make it to the statute books.

  2. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jan, 12:15pm

    An absurd exercise in futility. So much for the Tories bemoaning the nanny state. This is a classical example of it. It’s up to parents to decide what their children have access to, not the government or the taxpayer.

  3. Well said, Tim Farron! The porn-filter policy IS ineffective; it is censoring a great deal of information that is not pornographic.

  4. Yet again we see the Tory Nazi party in full swing. They are the ones that bemoaned the nanny state. And yet we see useless and draconian measures taken that directly affect our rights and liberty. It is up to parents, not the state to monitor what their kids do. Any kid with a little knowledge can get around these filters anyway.

    The Tories have not won my vote despite the introduction of SSM. Let us not forget that there are many within the Tory party who would like to ban SSM and even re-criminalise being gay.

    Without the support of Labour and the Lib Dems SSM would not have passed as over half of Tory MP’s opposed it!

  5. “Tim Farron clearly does not want to prioritise the safety of our children online or support our efforts to prevent anyone accidentally accessing illegal material,”

    A perfect Straw Man…from a desperately weak government.

    1. BlokeToys 10 Jan, 2:31pm

      “Tim Farron clearly does not want to prioritise the safety of our children online”

      How about the fuc*ing PARENTS do their fuc*ing jobs!?

      Man, this argument makes me angry every time. Why the hell should the entire country voluntarily limit their own freedoms to make the jobs of pathetic parents even easier?

      It is the responsibility of the parent to control what their child has access to, not the responsibility of the entire society to give up their freedoms and rights to make it as simple as can be for those lazy parents.

      Parents – take that phone off your ten year old and shut the fu*k up about porn. Take that computer out of their bedroom and put it in a family room. Install one of the many blocking programs any parent can get from numerous outlets. Or, better still, TALK TO YOUR CHILDREN and actually EDUCATE them!

      I wish people needed a license to breed.

  6. BlokeToys 10 Jan, 2:26pm

    This was nothing more than a multi-pronged solution to various things…

    1. It satisfied the right-wing religious nutters who would have everything but Bible-thumping nonsense banned.

    2. It placated the pathetic parents who seem to think the entire country should submit to fewer freedoms so they can sit back and relax, not actually raising their children themselves.

    3. And it allowed the government a foot in the door of internet censorship, which we KNOW will be abused and extended to allow them to force ISP’s to block access to all kinds of things in the future, and regardless of the soon-to-be-defunct Human Rights agreements the UK is subject to – coincidence, huh?

    What it didn’t do, however, is change access to adult content. Anyone can still use a Tor service to access anything they like, and teens are more adept at finding ways around these censors than their parents are at enforcing them.

    Idiotic government run by untrustworthy hypocrites and scoundrels.

  7. Tory policy; free market everything, free choice everything, until it offends the moral litmus test of the Daily Mail reader.

  8. Derek Williams 10 Jan, 3:52pm

    Indeed it should. It has blocked 100% of LGBT support sites including the Liberal Democrats’ own LGBT manifesto. I wrote to O2 to complain, and they responded that it was all about “protection of the children”.

  9. Filters are a bout as effective as search engines. I searched for something the other night and it brought up NOTHING for the subject I was looking for.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all