The BBC was today accused of ignoring its own charter requirement to offer balance by coming down firmly on the side of opt-in in respect of internet porn regulation. An "alliance of the concerned" drawn from academics and individuals representing the adult film industry added their voices to a chorus of dissent, claiming that …
"commercially favourable to the BBC"
I'm not sure how a porn opt-in is favourable to the BBC.
It's not an excess of free porn that's stopping me from watching Eastenders.
For me it's the fact that it is a:
"Soap opera so transparently fictitious it might as well be set on the fucking Moon"* that stops me from watching it.
*To quote TVGoHome
It would be commercially favorable because a lot of internet bandwidth *is* porn related. By embarrasing consumers into an opt-in system, the likes of the BBC hope to free up more bandwidth on the net for their own services, like iPlayer. BBC also wants to be in with the current government to secure its future funding. No matter how impartial the BBC claims to be, it always protects its own interests at the end of the day. Just look back on its history, you'll see the pattern of self preservation.
Too bloody true
Getting rid of the tv was one of the best things I ever did.
Bigotry and hatred
Does this mean that religious organizations will be paying for education on racial bias and bigotry and the problems they cause for society since they're the ones that seem to promote it?
Lets not forget
Sexism and Homophobia, the god blatherers invented that stuff.
Religion didn't create sexism it just validated and reinforced existing cultural behavior at that time. Homophobia I'll give you. Several cultures used to accept and sometimes encourage homosexuality.
The BBC? Biased?! Shocking!
I mean, I'd never think they were biased given their incredibly balanced views in all other areas such as religion, social demography, sexual equality and climate change...
Bernard M. Orwell
Should have included <sarcasm> </sarcasm> tags.
As in former editor-in-chief of the Daily / Sunday Sport which makes much of its income from "adult" advertising?
The BBC is like SkyB except that ...
it get free handouts from the taxpayer who must support under threat of fines or jail.
At least we know what Murdoch is, the BBC just pretends to be balanced.
Only the BBC would bring us an idiot like ...
Stephen Fry who knows diddly squat about technology and so many other things.
Who else would hire him?
And I quote...
"F-king agenda driven judas. And you can quote me on that."
Ha ha, classic! I missed the programme but it sounds like a typical example of nu-Lab spin. There was a puff-piece in the Scotsman by some sycophantic journalist recently where Jacqui sheds tears in an attempt to show she is actually human but merely betrays her profound ignorance more with each utterance. She is nothing more than an uptight, hypocritical fraudster and it's very disappointing that the BBC is allowing her to pursue her prudish personal agenda, whilst attempting to regain some public credibility!
Why doesn't she just move to China? They already have all the government censorship she wants. She could be happy there and not have to try to make the UK just like them.
Why do I need a title to reply to a post?
I find I cannot be rational about this woman. I just hate her so much. Why is she still in the public eye? She is .... I'll start and stop at 'clueless'.
I denounce Smith as a witch.
I demand trial by ducking stool, as is my right.
Yrs, Outraged Viewer.
That should have the same standing as her deranged rants, and a possible cure for them.
Burn the Witch
Before she starts uttering a spell to be bedevil us all.
we can hope
Wouldn't mind meeting that Arab
It's a fair cop
Does she weigh more or less than a duck?
More control via the backdoor (Ooer missus)
Wackie Jaqui is just another talking head for the function creep brigade who are more interested in controlling what we can see or do on the interweb thingie. She like the other whipping boys need to be put out of our misery. Preferably by being thorwn against a wall, bound up in leather bondage and have custard thrown over them whilst being forcibly licked clean from head to bottom by Ms Smith. I'd pay a dollar fer seeing that!
There is another thing...
...she fail to understand the Internet. All blockages will be routed around, without exception.
RE: There is another thing...
Tis true, thy vpn vanquishes the firewall o greatness easily and grantith access to thy facebook, thy twitter and thy iplayer, blessed be thy vpn.
annoyed of England writes
Just to clarify I did not WTFP however I am strongly against this kind of move toward censorship. I am all in favour of the sex education component provided the funding is is the form of sponsorship.
Can you imagine.
Kids, welcome to your sex education lesson sponsored by Fleshlight!
I was thinking more on the lines of:
Today we shall be learning about oral sex. Your tutors for the lesson will be Miss. Martha Melons and Mr. Whopper Chopper, take it away folks........
sex education sponsored by...
I will admit, this did sound ... intriguing? Especially if the content is also provided by the industry.
"Now children, please watch the video for the sex position of the week. Our show is sponsored by [insert porn producer brand name of choice here!], purveyers of quality porn. Don't forget - those over the age of consent may be interested in the jobs fair being held next month - [brand] is at stand #16."
Is that why the powers that be have recently allowed company advertising within shows to be allowed too?
I didn't bother to watch this as I could tell from the trailers and by who was presenting it, it would be a pile of unbalanced claptrap. Looks like I was right...
"I didn’t feel it was necessary for me to watch violent porn in order to legislate against it."
Same as Jackie, good one.
""I didn’t feel it was necessary for me to watch violent porn in order to legislate against it." After all, she hasn’t taken drugs either and was still able to legislate on that."
And we all know how evidence based drug law is.
What is a drug?
Can't remember, but was Ms Smith the Home Secretary when 24 hour drinking was brought in? (or was that he colleague Mr Straw).
Either way, the Labour government legislated to increase use of this dangerous addictive drug that is known to cause numerous social ills, increase violence and crime, and cause a huge strain on the NHS.
I'm assuming the comment was el Reg's little jibe at the fallacy of her logic. I would assume (though I know I'm wrong) that despite not taking drugs, she would be presented with evidence that they're harmful in order to legitimately legislate.
I wasn't aware that "violent porn" was harmful to anyone, assuming that it's acted out. I would also wonder at where the line was drawn with non-pornographic films that acted out violent sexual behaviours - presumably that's ok as long as it's not explicit?
At the end of the day though, I know that it's just a case of knee-jerk reactions and reverse-causality at play. No doubt there were cases of (actual) sex offenders who liked some of the pron that's been banned, and therefore in the head of Wacky, the converse was also true. Ergo ban it and sex offenders will cease to be.
the extreme porn law
The old Extreme porn law was brought in on the coat tails of the guy that strangled a woman, he happened to be into his hardcore hardcorez. That was more or less the extent of the evidence.
And the modification to cp law to include drawing was just brought in on the flights of fancy of morons, (oddly I happened to discover I know a reasonable number of morons personally.)
and again the subtle implication that if you don't support such censorship and bizare laws you are somehow closer to being a sex offender, so most people tow the line and if it went to a vote I suspect it would get passed with a healthy majority in the streets aswell as in the commons.
Likely wouldn't get passed the lords though, although it may do given the laws New Labour put in place to stop the Lords debating these things (they placed certain time limits so people supporting the government whip could drone on and take up all the alloted time meaning nothing could be discussed afterwards, this happened with both EP and CP mods.)
New Labour knew full well what a pain in the arse the lords could be and intentionally went out of the way to sabotage the only part of our system that properly balances the media fags and lobbiests that make up the rest of government. Not being elected give you a wonderful insight into things.
Don't know where to start on this one..
Can we not just send her a document that says all porn on the internet has been eradicated and she can now finally take a break from here long struggle against our freedom? If we 'opted-out' her ISP she'd never know the difference...
I Call Bullshit
Had never watched pron? At her age? Nah, don't believe it.
Didn't see the documentary, but might have to watch it so I can see what the fuss is about.
She saw the cover...
...but didn't open the case.
As in, she puffed but did not inhale.
Re: I Call Bullshit - her ignorance is incredible, but not un-credible
>> Had never watched pron? At her age? Nah, don't believe it.
If you had heard the documentary, you might change your mind. Her level of ignorance is staggering, though hardly surprising if you saw what a waste of space she was as Home Secretary (she is clearly ignorant of many (most?) things).
There is a point where she says that one of the things which surprised her most was the amount of material that was available for free, and therefore without enforcible age restrictions. That was the part where I realised that she was as ignorant as she making out - I bet she was really kicking herself about her husband's charges to her expense account. In case you have forgotten; he watched porn, the tax payer paid, she got into trouble and it all (except the first bit) could have been avoided if he had just used the web to do what it does best.
>> Didn't see the documentary, but might have to watch it so I can see what the fuss is about.
That sounds like an impressive radio you have got there (okay to be fair the article didn't mention it was on radio).
It's her husband I feel sorry for
"I tried porn, but did not impale."
Re: It's her husband I feel sorry for
Wondering, why hasn't anyone poured a bucket of water over her head? Not that I would, as it would mean putting my pneumatic hammer shlong away and going outside, but the porn, it keeps on calling me.
The other thing, is it going to be as shit as the mobile one where if you want to use google translate or other translation programs you'll need full fat porn internets anyway?
Just doing their BEEPing job
If these people are in favour of porn then they might use bad language as well. So obviously the BBC has to BEEP out anything they say. In the interests of fairness and balance, like.
It's really easy
Where does the censorship end? Porn off by default. Anti-Semitic off by default? Pro-ana off by default? FPS gaming off by default? Government criticism off by default?
You may or may not like porn. I am may or may not like many things, but I am not advocating censorship just because I don't like it (although...I'd probably not complain too loudly if religious and intelligent design sites/pages were "off by default"). Anyway...censorship is wrong. Period.
The responsibility lies with the parents and no one else.
Don't want your kiddies to get run over? Teach them how to cross the road and not to play on the motorway.
Don't want your kiddies to see porn? Learn how to install a proxy and don't allow them on the Internet unsupervised.
Do not abdicate YOUR responsibilities to MY wallet.
And as for Ms Smith - never seen porn? Bullshit. Has she never looked inside "The Sun"? Impartial outsider? Should more like a puritanical vigilante if you ask me.
Your missing the point
The difference is, porn is dangerous. Especially dangerous porn, which is really dangerous.
But not a dangerous as high explosive porn,
which of course is the most dangerous porn of all. A friend of mine lost an arm when he stumbled across a cache of unexploded porn.
Surely you're forgetting...
Good pr0n. bad pr0n
This is very reminiscent of Brass Eye. Good electricity and bad electricity...If only Christopher Mrris had given Jacqui Smith the... Nicholas Parsons, Darkus Howe, Carla Lane, Bernard Manning etc treatment.
@Joh I'm only dancing
Christopher Morris could not make up someone like Jacquie Smith.
Don't forget the Brass Eye that *really* got lots of grief was his superb hatchet job on media hysteria over CP, "Stranger danger" and other assorted BS in the British Isles, or rather the "Paedo Isles" as he called them.
I think youtube search on brass eye paedogeddon will get what you need.
Lost an arm?
Usually, you only lose use of your hand...
Thanks for the info John but I have the entire series already.
- Analysis iPhone 6: The final straw for Android makers eaten alive by the data parasite?
- First Crack Man buys iPHONE 6 and DROPS IT to SMASH on PURPOSE
- TOR users become FBI's No.1 hacking target after legal power grab
- Vid Reg bloke zips through an iPHONE 6 queue from ZERO to 60 SECONDS
- Analysis Why Oracle CEO Larry Ellison had to go ... Except he hasn't