How Internet in the UK is “Sleepwalking into Censorship”

A great article has emerged from Open Rights Group detailing just how egregious David Cameron’s plan to censor the internet in the UK really is. While I’m sure most of you are aware of Cameron’s proposed plan to automatically block web access to “porn” from the British citizenry, you probably aren’t aware of some of the specifics. As usual, the devil is in the details and you discover what the whole thing is really about – censorship of political material that would prove inconvenient for the elite criminal class.

There are two main things to be aware of. First, under the rules proposed to go into effect in 2014, the default setting will be to filter a wide range of material. Second, the filtering isn’t just of porn, rather it includes nine other categories, such as “esoteric material,” “web forums,” and “extremist and terrorist related content.”

See how dangerous this is? Do you trust government to define for us what “extremist or terrorist” content is when these same governments incredibly tell us that our enemies list is “classified.” Furthermore, who defines what “esoteric” material is? Esoteric could easily be defined as anything not covered by the mainstream media, which is everything that matters.

From Open Rights Group:

After brief conversations with some of the Internet Service Providers that will be implementing the UK’s “pornwall” we’ve established a little bit about what it will be doing. 

The essential detail is that they will assume you want filters enabled across a wide range of content, and unless you un-tick the option, network filters will be enabled. As we’ve said repeatedly, it’s not just about hardcore pornography.

You’ll encounter something like this:

EDIT NOTE: the category examples are based on current mobile configurations and broad indications from ISPs

(1) Screen one

“Parental controls”
Do you want to install / enable parental controls
☑ yes
☐ no

[next]

(2) Screen two [if you have left the box ticked]

“Parental controls”

Do you want to block

☑ pornography
☑ violent material
☑ extremist and terrorist related content
☑ anorexia and eating disorder websites
☑ suicide related websites
☑ alcohol
☑ smoking
☑ web forums
☑ esoteric material
☑ web blocking circumvention tools

Remember, all of the boxes checked above represent the “default setting” for your web browser under the proposed rules. Furthermore, what about “violent material.” While that seems reasonable, something like police brutality caught on tape would surely fall into that category. Or perhaps the police tasering an elderly person to death, which just happened in the state of Illinois. That would also likely be blocked. For your own good of course.

More from Open Rights Group:

What’s clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind ‘nudge theory‘ and ‘choice architecture’ that is popular with Cameron.

Of course, all of this could be easily avoided by simply having an ‘active choice’ as the ISPs originally suggested: with no preset defaults, forcing customers to specify whether they wanted filters, or not.

It’s really very surprising that Cameron’s campaign has spent six months insisting on a system designed to fail consumers, threatening ISPs with legislation if they didn’t use the inaccurate, error prone method that Number 10 seem to believe in.

Full article here.

In Liberty,
Mike

Follow me on Twitter!

Follow me on Twitter.