OK – not just yet, but let’s start looking at the possibilities…
When a politician uses the words; “for the sake of the children” or one of the million other derivatives thereof – you know what is going on in their mind.
They are thinking, that is a loose term, about something that will stop access to information. They will say that this isn’t the case – they will baulk at the idea will cause anyone any problems and will reiterate that, because of their actions, children will be safer – so if you actually call them out on it, it will be seen as a direct attack on Mr and Mrs Smith’s children and you will be demonised in some way.
The same can be said for the word ‘pervasive’ – what could be more pervasive than government, and the stupid laws it keeps enacting? But that is another blog.
Culture Secretary Andy Burnham (UK) says that there should be a rating system on the internet – something like they do on movies or console games, R rated because of certain content. Now, looking at the fact that the internet is quite big, and full of all sorts of content, would this blog be censored?
Strangely it could be – basically because I allow expletives to be used. But, as always there is a problem with censoring things – dear Andy has a massive problem you see – and that problem is exactly the same as with DVD’s – parents see a film and disagree with the censor and allow their children to watch a movie that the censor deems not applicable to that age group. The DVD retailer or renter will, as is by law, only sell the DVD to someone who comes in to rent or buy – who watches the film is none of their business.
So anything that is the Labour government they are taking a jack-hammer to break a walnut.
It isn’t governments place to legislate what happens in the home – while I do agree that you shouldn’t be able to take you child to see ‘Saw’ at the movies – that is an adult domain, and I don’t think it is apt that kids watch that genre of film at home – but it is up to the parents to oversee what their kids are doing.
What dear Andy obviously doesn’t understand is there are many pieces of software out on that very evil internet that you can download so that kiddie doesn’t watch certain content – or he does and just wants to forge ahead with his stupid idea.
This is a member of parliament, a person that you would think is an educated person – but as dad used to say “educated idiot comes to mind”. On the very PC that his darling children are using you have content restrictions if you want to utilise them – odd then that he asks for censorship – but the question I ask, is why isn’t he or Mrs Andy supervising what the kiddies are doing online?
He must be a busy man not to allow his kids to be supervised.
Mr Burnham’s plans are likely to anger those who advocate the freedom of the worldwide web.
He insisted he was not trying to curb free speech, but wanted to protect the public from “unacceptable” material.
“It’s not about banning or stopping people having that freedom of expression,” he said. “It’s simply about clearer signposting, more information, so people know where they’re working.”
And that is called bullshit!
Many places you have to sign-up for and stipulate that you’re a certain age – many ask if you are over that age – and now he wants to add a rating to that content?
How about, as he is ‘Culture secretary’ he does something regarding culture – like advocating a day for the English? How about he gets plenty of culture in schools? How about he supervises his kids on the internet? How about he promotes culture?
Rather than that he chooses to inflict internet censorship – obviously for the sake of the children – but as always when this happens – the prick who advocates it never thinks of the bigger picture.
You are wanting internet censorship Mr Burnham – it is as simple as that – there are other who agree with your idiotic idea, but you never will censor the internet in your way unless you do as China does – that is where you are looking.
Why the hell are these people paid so much?