Has Britain lost the right to free speech? As the UK government cracks down on online hate groups, child pornography and extremist narratives, is government-controlled censorship really the solution? British Prime Minister David Cameron will be hosting a cyber summit meeting with U.S. leaders at 10 Downing Street to finalize the introduction of a new software that will automatically block 100,000 search terms that the government deem to be illegal content.
Cameron announced in July that Internet service providers in England would be required to install default filters that would block pornography. Last week, Google and Microsoft announced some details of the software used to censors 100,000 search terms.
Critics of this law fear it would give the British government the ability to censor any information it feels is dangerous. As the government is calling the shots, there is a feeling that the UK is paying a higher price on personal freedom in this battle to stop child pornography.
In practical terms, the new law affects every household in England connected to the Internet. Each household will be obliged to declare to authorities whether they want to maintain access to online pornography.
In the most dramatic step, the law will impose rules that all Internet users will be contacted by their service providers and given an “unavoidable choice” on whether to use filters. These new measures are scheduled to be introduced next year, but through backdoor loopholes the government is already forcing new customers to have these filters in place by the end of this year.
Reactions against the law is strong. Birmingham University student union activist Deepa Patel told Mint that it’s a complete overreaction to the problem.
“Sure we don’t want pedophiles in this country, but I also believe that people should be able to read material free of government censorship. This is supposed to be a democracy not a Stalin state,” Patel said. “I’m Sikh and many of my friends are Muslim. We are the target of the government assault on civil liberties. I fear I will not be able to contact my family and friends at home now. Not because of any illegal activities, but I’m sure if I use a Sikh term or worst a Muslim term then that would set off alarms.”
Patel said she wants to know the exact 100,000 search terms the government plans to block, but doesn’t expect that information will be released.
Despite strong opposition to the bill, the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children welcomed the measures to reduce access to pornography with a particular focus on images of child sexual abuse.
In a statement to Mint, the NSPCC said that after years of pressing the government to tackle vile and illegal child-abuse images and introduce measures to protect young eyes from inappropriate content, they are delighted that Cameron’s proposal closely reflected their own priorities.
Under the law many of the NSPCC’s concerns over the possession of “extreme pornography,” which includes scenes of simulated rape, will be outlawed, and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) will compile a blacklist of “abhorrent” search terms in the hopes of preventing pedophiles from searching for illegal material.
NSPCC CEO Peter Wanless said the measures are a big step in taking firm action to block legal adult pornography from young eyes.
“This isn’t about censorship or restricting freedom, it’s simply about protecting children while allowing adults to do as they choose within the law,” Wanless said. “Young minds are not developed enough to make grown up decisions about these issues.”
According to a NSPCC research paper, child pornography is a growing industry. It found 140,000 child-abuse images in circulation and concluded that the volume was increasing. Its research also indicated an increasing numbers of adults have a sexual interest in children.
Responding to the mounting pressure from the UK and child protection agencies, Twitter introduced a tagging system to prevent child pornography images from being posted on its service. There are now millions of pictures posted among the two billion tweets every five days. The intention is to introduce the system, which uses a Microsoft-developed industry standard called Photo DNA, this year if possible.
Cameron praised the work by Google and Microsoft to implement measures to prevent child pornography, calling it “significant progress” after the companies had previously insisted that it “couldn’t be done, shouldn’t be done”.
But others do not share his view. In an interview with the Telegraph, Dr Joss Wright, a research fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute at the University of Oxford, said it’s important to remember that Google is a search engine not the Internet, so the only thing it will be able to block are search items. Google won’t be able to remove it from the Internet.
“If they are searching for it [child pornogophy], they will now just go to search engine A or B,” Wright said.
Wright dismissed the government censorship measure as impractical, explaining that many pedophiles use encrypted systems rather than websites to share child pornography.
“Does it really have a significant effect? Are there really a significant number of people Googling child porn? I am not convinced it is going to have a huge impact,” Wright told the Telegraph.