Websites could potentially be given film/gaming style
age-ratings to limit children's access to harmful and offensive materials. Culture
Secretary Andy Burnham has said clearer standards need to define what can be
displayed online.
Mr Burnham has said the government is looking at a number of possible new
internet safeguards and they also plan to negotiate with the USA on drawing up international
rules for English language websites. Mr Burnham, states that internet service
providers (ISPs) should offer child-friendly web access.
"The internet is becoming a more and more pervasive entity in all
our lives and yet the content standards online are not as clear as we've all
been used in traditional media. I think we do need to have a debate now about
clearer signposting and labelling online because it can be quite a confusing
world, particularly for parents who are trying to ensure their children are
only accessing appropriate stuff."
He has insisted he is 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."
John Carr, secretary of the UK Children's Charities' Coalition for Internet
Safety, said other countries were looking at similar measures. "Nobody
would deny there are enormous practical problems, there isn't a body, an
obvious body, that could do this type of classification here in the UK at
the moment, but it's definitely an aspiration that many governments across the
world are now reaching to."
A poll carried out by the NSPCC in October 2008 suggested three out of four UK
children have been disturbed by images they had seen on the internet.
Diana Sutton, head of policy and public affairs at the NSPCC, said "It's
one thing to have a political commitment, but it's much harder to actually
enforce it, we want these ideas to have teeth. And these mechanisms on their own
aren't enough. They've got to be combined with greater parental awareness. Most
parents have no clue what their children are up to online. What I think is
missing from these proposals is that it's not just about what sites children
might see, it's about who they might meet online"
Could this idea could potentially lead onto a situation much like that in Australia,
which is due to start live trials of ISP-level content filtering? The
Australian scheme is costing approximately £55.2 and has met with much
uproar from it's citizens, an online poll by a newspaper in Queensland showed that 86% of respondents
did not support the scheme.
The Australian project proposes to offer a "clean-feed" web
service to all homes, schools and public internet access points in the country.
All feed will have two ‘blacklists': one that blocks all illegal material, such
as child abuse images; and the second which blocks a list of things deemed
unsuitable for children, which will determined by the Australian Communications
and Media Authority (ACMA). Only the latter blacklist will be optional for
Australians.
Currently filtering in the UK's
is not mandatory by ISPs, they can block sites according to information which
is provided by the Internet Watch Foundation.
Is such a scheme feasible in today's society? Is it needed or even
manageable? What other options should the Government be considering alongside
the idea of ‘cinema' style ratings for websites?