Picture credit: Jude
I am wondering when someone will take the UK Cabinet behind the bikesheds and tell them the truth about the Internet. Andy Burnham, Culture Secretary, is the latest member of the UK Government to demonstrate ignorance about the way the world-wide-web works. It’s no surprise that the Government wants to extend the Nanny State but they are acting more like a Ninny State, by not thinking of the practical consequences of their policies.
In an interview in the Daily Telegraph, Burnham sets out a raft of his plans to censor the web and admits that the measures may appear heavy-handed. Here is a key quote from Mr Burnham:
“There is content that should just not be available to be viewed. That is my view. Absolutely categorical. This is not a campaign against free speech, far from it; it is simply there is a wider public interest at stake when it involves harm to other people. We have got to get better at defining where the public interest lies and being clear about it.”
Of course, Burnham claims that his motivation is to protect children from unsuitable material. But we know from bitter experience that the ostensible reasons given for legislation are too often later extended for other political purposes.
Parents need to accept responsibility for their own children, by ensuring that appropriate safeguards and [parental] standards are practised in the home. Software and sensitive personal supervision of their kid’s web activity is a far more sensible solution than espousing undeliverable policies of censorship and state intervention.
Here are a few questions for Andy Burnham:
- Who will rate websites?
- Will it be opt-in, or opt-out?
- Who will pay for it?
- Who will police the policy?
- How will trans-national cultural sensitivities be accommodated?
I don’t suppose any of these questions were considered before these brave new policies were espoused. Which is a pity, because they are so obviously needing answers. We deserve better thinking from our elected leaders.
