Another very stupid politician standing up doing the king canute ( or take a couple of vowels away and rearrange) act - back tide I say and begone.

I find there is far more harmful content in a politicians speeches as they are more damaging to peoples minds than any amount interwibble xxx content.

Can we have a delete key for the house of commons ?

oh just fuck off you fucking fucks. Is my message to these fucking idiots, just before they get shot by a firing squad from the "British Liberation Army" *sigh* I can dream right? Shame a large percentage of this country is manned by repellant retards that believe in this kind of vomit.

Sorry about the language - but they just make me sick. The politicos and the populace.

Jacqui Smith (Home Office) also wants a big delete button.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/17/home_office_smith_speech_web_terror_crackdown_insanity/

Conclusion: This is government policy across any and all departments which could possibly have anything to do with the Internet and even though if the talking head changes the policy will stay the same.

And that's how it was possible to "subtly" upgrade the suggestion from the Byron report that net nanny software be made available to parents to a big delete button in Whitehall.

It used to be that TV was denigrated by radio listeners, and before TV, radio listeners were denigrated by readers...

Now some no-nothing from government is making the same connection between the internet and TV. As another commenter noted (Mike Crawshaw), TV isn't exactly covering itself in glory right now...

Kids are curious - they always have been, always will be - it's all part of some weird thing that happens called "growing up". Now when I were a lad (nostalgia hat on) - we weren't allowed out round the neighbourhood to play unless we had a good understanding of what we could and couldn't do out there - and if you didn't have that knowledge, you were accompanied by an older brother / sister. It amazes me that although the playground seems to have changed from local streets to the internet, parents still allow kids to wander at will - often unsupervised (computer in the bedroom - keeps them off the streets - keeps them out of the parent's hair...)

I realise this is a tech site, and so the visitors on here who also happen to be parents will be aware of what the internet is - a place where there really is too much information sometimes - and plenty of it that isn't suitable for these almost middle-aged eyes - never mind young children clicking randomly from one page to another. Knowing some IT-literate friends who have children, they have their computers in communal areas, which are always in sight. It seems that often, it's when the kids know more about technology than their parents when the problems start to occur.

I don't have any answers to this, as I'm not a Daily Mail / Express reader - just my observations.

Are people that scared of saying no to their hoody wearing, knife carrying children? Oh wait, that might mean actually having to speak to them...

What a patronising law, we can't talk about adult topics unless it's sanctioned by a government body as acceptable to small children? Isn't that just a creepy censoring government hiding behind the excuse of protecting kids?

Are we all supposed to talk like "diddums my dibby powitician is stoopidy", baby talk for them?

What about Tard Children? Don't they need EXTRA care? Can't we make the Internet safe for tards? Wrap the corners of the DSL box in padding so they don't hurt themselves perhaps?

How about dotty old women with dried up vaginas that are bitter about men and live on their own in their sad little rooms with lots of cats? They need EXTRA EXTRA care, why they even have Curfews because sounds late at night frighten them.

Or it's just another smothering nanny law courtesy of your unelected Prime Minister and his creepy Blairite ministers?

"TV is where people often look for expert or authoritative opinion."

If they do they are deluded. The days of impartial, informative TV are long gone, if they ever existed in the first place. Is the bias on TV fairly modern or as access to the internet revealed 'factual' TV programming for the sham it is? TV is full of junk science and opinion masquerading as fact. The hideously bad BBC Panarama episode on wireless networking springs to mind. It seems to me TV is just like the internet, the bloggers just have bigger wallets.

So let me get this straight. The content in question is perfectly legal, so the logical response to it is to ban it because some children might see. Right. While we're at it, why don't we ban cars as well? Children aren't allowed to drive them but one might get in my car at some point, and we can't be having that now, can we?

"TV is where people often look for expert or authoritative opinion."

Its very clear where this is all heading - Think China - think Bloggers getting arrested think UK next...

This is fundementally where we are heading.

As he says people often turn to TV (controlled content tells you what they wish to tell you wish things such as news being filtered by GOV to ensure we get to hear what they want us to hear)

God forbit we have a few brains cells and can think for our ownselves and have our own views.

If they wanted kids to be safe on the internet either ban internet for kids since its bad for them exactly like alcohol and smokings and let them use it when they are 16 or 18.

Or just simply offer an insentive to parents to go via content filtered connection such as AOL

This is just another step to 1984.

These fuckwits couldn't find their arses with both hands behind their backs - and stapled to their arses.

They'll shout a lot, get a few headlines and then quietly kill it once it's eplained to them what a bunch of ignorant cock-pockets they are and how it would only ever be a political clusterfuck if they did more than just waffle.

"These are either the words of someone who hasn’t the first idea how user-generated content works – or alternatively, a man with a very sinister plan indeed."

Considering he is expounding upon the subject, I think we can bin the first thought and accept the second.

"Governments across Europe are not altogether happy with the way in which user-generated content is allowing debate to open up on issues in ways they can no longer control."

Oh dear. What a Shame Not. Get Used to IT Being So. You may Consider that a Fully Transparent Global Meritocracy will Virtually Appear and Present Closed Closetted Government with their Weaknesses in the Greater Global InterNetional Context.

Governments are Not there to Actually Lead, that is the Leader's Job, they are there to Server the Will of the People which they are Duty Bound Surely to Gather and Reflect? The Napoleon/Caesar Types will just espouse their own hidden agenda/dodgy views and always refrain from answering questions which need dodging because of what is hidden or not there. Politician's Block to Prevent Discovery thus ForeStalling Recovery..... which is Scandalous and probably Treasonable in Noble Times.

Presently they Sit in Judgement of those Needs and whether to Feed with Cash Donated .... which would be All Taxation. And that is a Rank Abuse of the System which will always Disadvantage and Discriminate against the Poor and the Less Well Educated, Allowing Virtual Slavery to Flourish.

Obviously a State of Affairs which is Inequitable and Cruel and thus with no Place in a Supposed Civilised Society in the 21st Century. For it to Survive will Render the Notion of a Global Civilisation with any Power or Control of Civilisation, Null and Void. A Myth Perpetuated to Rig the Great Game for Dark and Ancient Orders, with Apparently Zero Ability to Change the State of World Affairs with IT and Media BroadBandCasting [also sometimes known as TV] into a Beta Game for One and All.

You may like to Consider that that is AI Beta Plan Constructed as an ARGonaut's Quest.

"Big Celebrity Strictly Come Wanking Pigs Brother"

Sir, that's outstanding. I may borrow it from time to time if that is ok with you.

Given that laws in the UK are fairly puritanical, anything more than soft porn is hosted abroad. So how does this idiot think he is going to get cooperation from companies hosting hardcore porn in say, Russia? I can't see even the Germans or Scandinavians agreeing to this.

If they are so worried about making the Internet safe for kids, why don't they give a shit about the streets of major cities? If a child of mine saw some porn on the Internet, I wouldn't be quite as worried as if they got stabbed on the way home from school.

The irony is still, that whilst the UK spirals off racing towards a fascist despotism, China gingerly babysteps towards a more open society (sure it ain't going quickly but a generation ago China was a completly different place to how it is now, I know a great many Chinese who say that China was bad, but now it seems far better then where the UK is going, and these people left China for a land of freedom, now they've seen it, they wanna go back.) Infact every Chinese person I know at the moment is looking to going back.

This guy is from the labour statist government. He REALLY believes that the state should intervene in everything - he's only taking it to its logical conclusion. What everybody needs to do is vote the buggers out at the next election - anybody who voted labour is basically getting what they voted for.

Big Celebrity Strictly Come Wanking Pigs Brother

Thats outstanding, someone grab the domain & well host it offshore

Yeah right, this guy is deluded, most of TV is pulp propaganda.

If only we had a list of government, and civil service IPs we could just block them from even seeing it.

Well media companies seem good at detecting that we arn't in their region so we don't get their streaming content (Japan and the States both have sites that are good at this) as such it wouldn't be mind boggelingly difficult for a neo-fascist puritan government to get all IP addresses that arn't in the UK black listed... as such turning out the lights and creating a nice happy environment for us all to live in whilst we roast dog on spits huddled under bridges paying a few bags of crisps to hookers for a few hours of aids infested in out in out ontop of a rug of old bin bags and animal carcases. Until one day the cleaners come and gun us down.

No one from outside the country will know of our plight, not being allowed to leave the protected green zones created in brighlty lit utopian cities fed a constant stream of government sponcered media.

The futures bright, the futures nugov.

Who's going to vote in the next election?

Byron.Review@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk

I think we should all email her at above address and tell he psychology is physical and Internet is virtual

to get her head out out of her virtual arse.

The UK will do it the same way as China, Thailand, and some South American countries do it... The technology exists to allow only what "the Man" says is acceptable to be online. It'll be too bad when the UK is part of the aformentioned list, but that's they way it's probably going to do. No one in the West has covered themselves in Glorious Uprisings for Freedom in the past few years and I don't think anyone has the gumption start now either.

Once again a government minister wins the Total Bollocks Award. You don't need a delete key for inappropriate content, you need parental responsibility and the OFF switch.

Could it not be argued that the IWF is being used to activate a Graet Firewall of the UK?

Start with the soft option (everyone hates kiddie porn, possible the more it gives you wood the harder you say you hate it)

And the ratchet it all up; chat rooms suicide sites,bittorent bans, horse fuckers, I assume the next to fall under the easy option will be hooker sites, as they have done with the classifieds in the local newspapers

Is it something in their DNA that makes them want to do it?

As someone earlier mentioned,`anyone critical of the UK gov may have to have their content hosted in Russia´, yeah and probably have to live there too!

In response to Andy Burn'em (Books, Computers or anything not approved by Govuk). The job of controlling content in the lives of children, whether online or elsewhere is the responsibility of parents. The whole point of our having evolved this way , where mature humans give birth to young that have a relatively prolonged immature stage, is so that the relevant information that will equip the young for survival can be imparted to said young by their parents during this stage. Just like most of the other animals on the planet.

If the parents don't know how to do this , then teach them, surprisingly learning how to be a parent starts in childhood ( Oh no , can't do that it's sexual stereotyping) . Governments should be around to lead and by bringing together resources provide infrastructure for society, they are NOT for controlling every last detail of people's lives, so tell Andy to either help parents to parent , or fuck off and mind the business of his own family

why *should* the internet be made suitable for children?

The internet is basically a place for everyone to communicate with each other. If you don't want your children communicating with random strangers, which is exactly what the internet is designed to facilitate, then don't let them use it. Exercise some f*cking parental responsibility instead of ruining it for the rest of us.

I believe we should ban or regulate cameras. Their user generated content is often tawdry. Surely we can devise a camera which will take only (UK) gov. approved pix!

the old farts who want to enjoy their retirement and see all the stuff they were never allowed to access while at work? And with age running against them, they need the nasty bits advertised Real Big and Everywhere to make sure they don't get lost on the way.

Get Inphormed, and turn off the telly already.

"...to block material that is not actually illegal to possess."

Not forgetting, of course, their plans to criminalise possession of material of acts that are not actually illegal to do!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/30/scotland_extreme_pr0n_law/

http://www.caan.org.uk/