Iceland's solution to the menace of online pornography

This week Iceland announced radical proposals which could see it become the first Western democracy to block all internet pornography.

A law forbidding the printing and distribution of pornography is already in force in Iceland but, presently, it doesn’t cover on-line material.

Following a widespread investigation into the effects of pornography, which included evidence from teachers, law enforcers and organisations working with abused children, a strong cross-party consensus is building that violent pornography is damaging and must be controlled.

Iceland’s investigation concluded that the extremely violent nature of much online pornography was increasing the intensity of sex attacks.  It also found that children exposed to violent porn showed similar signs of trauma to those who have been physically abused.

A number of methods to achieve a ban are under consideration including blocking access to pornographic websites and making it illegal to use Icelandic credit cards to access pay-per-view pornography.

An Icelandic government spokesperson said “we are looking at the best technical ways to achieve this, but surely, if we can send a man to the moon, we must be able to tackle porn on the internet.”  She continued “it is no longer acceptable to keep blaming parents for the fact that children see graphic sexual content.  Parents are not the only ones responsible for protecting our young people.  They cannot be with their children all the time and the porn industry actively tries to seek children out”.

Iceland’s approach has been called ‘progressive’; looking at pornography from the perspective of the harm it does to women and to children who are having their sexuality hijacked at a young age by brutal sexual imagery.

The measures for which we have been campaigning in the UK would see adult material blocked as a default although those wishing to access such material would be able to opt-in to do so.  The proposals being discussed in Iceland go much further and we await the outcome with interest.

In Iceland tackling the menace of internet pornography has become a cross-party issue.  We are hopeful that a similar political consensus will emerge in the UK.  Last week Labour frontbencher, Diana Abbott, spoke of our ‘increasingly pornified’ culture and David Cameron has said he finds the fact that children are able to access such material ‘utterly appalling’.

We need online age checks

This week it was announced that Ofcom had fined Playboy £100,000 because it had offered hardcore pornographic films online that could easily be accessed by children.

All that stood between children and explicit content was a tick box in which the user confirmed they were over 18; a system open to abuse from much younger children.  More explicit material was available with just a debit card despite the fact that such cards are readily available to under-18s.

That Ofcom has fined Playboy for its failure to protect children and is taking age verification seriously is excellent news.

Age verification is very important.  Industry has a role to play in protecting children and there are measures that can and should be taken to ensure this happens. 

The online gambling industry is a good example of this; prior to 2005 there was plenty of evidence that children were managing to gamble despite being under age.  The Gambling Act 2005 specifically regulated online gambling for the first time and providers were required to verify the ages of their customers by, for example, checking credit ratings and inclusion in the electoral roll.  This all but eradicated underage online gambling and is a system that should be used to protect children in other areas.

When last summer’s consultation into protecting children online was launched the government was criticised for not explicitly referring to age verification measures.  The issue was raised in the House of Lords second reading debate of Baroness Howe’s Online Safety Bill.  Peers noted that age verification worked in the case of online gambling and called for robust government action to ensure that the industry acts on this responsibly.  They were particularly concerned that there is currently no level platform of what is or isn’t acceptable as each provider works on their own.

This was summed up in the speech by Lord Bishop of Norwich who said “…we are very protective of the bodies of the young, with the exception of the eyes.”

As a result of this debate the Prime Minister has specifically addressed the issue.  Announcing the appointment of Claire Perry MP as his advisor on reversing the sexualistion of childhood he said “…providers need to work to verify the age of the person…”, Mrs Perry added “…if you have proper age verification systems, then I think this new system will put us a long way ahead of the rest of the world.”

We have raised the issue of ineffective age verification in the past – particularly in relation to video-on-demand broadcasts.  This new ruling from Ofcom sends a clear message that providers can no longer hide behind crude and outdated verification methods. 

There will very likely be a cost implication in introducing adequate protection but concerns about this cannot be allowed to outweigh the introduction of meaningful measures to prevent damage to children.

A wonderfully positive end to 2012

Last week the government published the results of their consultation into protecting children online which rejected the idea of an automatic block on explicit sites.  However, yesterday

David Cameron announced that web filters would
now be default for all houses with children.

In the future new users will be asked, the first time they switched on a computer, whether or not there are children in the house.  If they answer yes they will be prompted to tailor filters which include options to block particular kinds of content, individual sites or restrict access at specific times of day.  If parents click through the options quickly in the set up, filters against pornography and self harm sites will be left on. They will also have to verify that they are over 18.

Mr Cameron has appointed Claire Perry MP as his adviser on reversing the commercialisation and sexualisation of children.  Mrs Perry led the campaign for wider online filters in the UK and she will now be in charge of implementing this new filter system. 

This is a huge step in the right direction although it remains to be seen just how the system will function and whether or not it will offer the same degree of protection as the ‘opt-in’ option.  It is also still unclear whether this filter will work at device or network level and how it will be rolled out to existing customers; consumers don’t often change their ISPs and, given a 15% ‘churn’ rate, it would take 6 years until restrictions were on most computers which is an unacceptably long time. 

However, this is undoubtedly good news; this new system means that the UK will be leading the world in making the online environment safe for children.

Thank you for your part in making this a reality.

It’s a wonderful, positive way to end 2012. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Protecting children online: the 'official' view

Today the Government published its response to the consultation on parental internet controls which took place earlier this year.  You can read the full response here.

The consultation reveals that 57 per cent of the 757 parents who responded to the consultation were in favour of stricter controls, including 47 per cent who wanted an opt-in system.

However, in total, just one in six of the 3,509 respondents – most of whom were not parents – supported the full opt-in solution.  According to media reports two-thirds of the respondents were from the Open Rights Group, which campaigns against default filters to block online pornography.

The report recommends that:

• Internet service providers actively encourage people to switch on parental controls if children are in the household and will be using the internet.

• Internet service providers should actively encourage parents – whether new or existing customers – to switch on parental controls.

• The industry, including retailers and device manufacturers, should work to develop universally-available, family-friendly internet access.  All internet-enabled devices should be supplied with the tools to keep children safe as standard.

Ministers will now work with industry, charities and experts to make these recommendations a reality.  This process will begin at the board meeting of the UK Council for Children Internet Safety on Monday.

We are delighted that real attention is being paid to children’s online safety and action is now taking place.  However we are disappointed that the recommendations fall someway short of the opt-in measure which we, and many other charities and children’s organisations, believe to be the best way to ensure that the majority of children are protected from harmful online material.  Our campaign for this vital protection continues and we will let you know the next step – and how you can get involved – in the New Year.

Learning the lessons of porn

Last month the National Association of Head Teachers controversially recommended that children should be taught about the impact of pornography as part of the sex education curriculum.

They pointed out that children have easy access to hardcore material on the internet and they need to be aware of its dangers and potential impact.

This week the position was clarified by Education Minister, Liz Truss, in answer to a parliamentary question.  She said that schools are free to tackle the subject of pornography in an age appropriate fashion as part of PSHE lessons.

Although many children are not looking for pornography, pornography is looking for them.  The sad fact is that the vast majority will encounter it as they grow up.  Now we need to equip them with the skills they need to deal with the effects of our overtly sexualised world.

As a society we have failed to face up to the effects of pornography and it is our children who have become the casualties. 

We are naïve if we think we can prevent children getting access to pornographic images.  We can control computer access, television and smart phones at home but, as things stand, these measures will barely stem the tide of images and themes which come at them from sources we can’t control, such as friends and peers.  

A recent study revealed that, whilst 50% of parents were confident they knew how to track what their child did online, 80% teenagers said they knew how to hide their online behaviour from their parents.   Almost one in three British parents makes no effort at all to monitor their teenager's activity online.

It’s a sad indictment of our society today but it is far better that we teach children that pornography is not like real life and portrays a distorted view of sexuality and relationships than leave them to make sense of it alone.

However, introducing lessons to help children deal with the impact of pornography is merely a sticking plaster solution; we need to tackle the cause as well as the effect.

The government must implement an opt-in system to limit the risk of children accessing online sexual content as a matter of urgency. 

The consultation into how best to protect children online which ran this summer was shorter than usual to allow a speedy response.  However, despite the high number of submissions received, minsters have yet to respond or even reveal the majority view.  The government is dragging its feet on this issue and a further generation of children will pay the price.

What next for the BBC?

This week has been a very difficult one for the BBC.   False allegations of paedophilia against a Conservative Party grandee have led to the resignation of the Director General, the possible demise of the flagship Newsnight programme, and the paying out of substantial libel damages.

Broadcasting has a huge impact on society; in the words of Andrew Greystone of the Church & Media Network “the events at the BBC, which were kicked-off not by malice amongst programme-makers but by the wickedness of a former presenter, will simply compound the much wider loss of public trust in national institutions.”

Our call for responsible broadcasting – which goes far beyond just that which reaches the airwaves - has never been more vital.

But we must defend that which is good.  There are plenty who would dearly love to see the BBC seriously curtailed.  Speaking at the Edinburgh Television Festival a few years ago James Murdoch attacked the BBC for ‘dumping state sponsored news’ into the market; of course the news the BBC is accused of dumping is exactly that for which News Corps would like to charge.  Instead of ‘state sponsored’ news Mr Murdoch would like to see big business sponsored news

He said that the only ‘reliable, durable and perpetual guarantor of independence is profit’ – not quality, standards or diversity, just profit. 

We should bear in mind that broadcasting has a far greater impact and influence on society than just profits.

We may not always agree with all the decisions made by the BBC, or the totality of its output, but it does aspire to the highest standards in journalism and its other productions.  In many ways it sets the benchmark for other broadcasters.  The resignation of George Entwistle is a recognition that those high standards have not been met and that they are, ultimately, more important than members of staff and individual programmes.

We are delighted that a formal independent investigation into culture and practices at the BBC is taking place and that important questions are being asked about the way the BBC is managed.  

This evening the BBC will host its annual Children in Need telethon.  Children in Need is the BBC’s corporate charity which works to help disadvantaged children in the UK and, since it’s inception in 1980, it has raised over £650 million.  This BBC initiative is a laudable example of the impact and that influence that the institution and its output has on our society.

Balancing free speech and child protection

Today a law that aims to protect children from harmful internet content by allowing the government to take sites offline has taken effect in Russia.  Websites can now be blacklisted and forced offline without a trial and, if the sites themselves cannot be closed, ISPs will be forced to block access to them.

This law has been described by critics as yet another attempt by President Putin to exercise control over the population.  "Of course there are websites that should not be accessible to children, but I don't think it will be limited to that," warned a spokesman for the human rights organisation Citizens' Watch.

We have been campaigning for some time for better protection for children online in the UK; we would like to see a system whereby potentially harmful websites are blocked as a default unless adult users specifically opt in to access them.

This is not the same as the new Russian system.

The UK proposal involves an independent regulator which would be tasked with setting clear parameters of what would, and what would not be, acceptable on a ‘clean feed’.  Websites which felt they were being unfairly blocked would have a right to appeal any decision.

Earlier this year we found that our website and blog were being blocked by filters designed to offer a safe browsing experience for children on mobile devices.  These filters are applied as a default on all mobile devices which access the internet unless adult users choose to remove them.  Although neither our blog nor our website include pornography such material is alluded to in the context of our campaign and our sites were being filtered out.

We contacted the Mobile Broadband Group and pointed out the misclassification and it was a simple matter to get the restrictions lifted.  

Protecting children online is vital but so is protecting free speech.  Our experience shows that the system we already have in place in the UK for mobile browsing is working and errors are easily rectified.  Later this year the outcome of the recent consultation into protecting children online will be announced, it is to be hoped that mis-advised concerns about censorship are not be elevated above children’s online safety.