Porn, piracy and the internet culture wars


ISPA: "It is not for us to police online content"

On the Today Programme this morning you could hear the sound of a great cultural divide opening up over the policing of the internet. Following the court ruling ordering Internet Service Providers to block access to the Pirate Bay, the programme invited a politician and a representative from the internet industry to discuss the issues raised.

The politician was Claire Perry MP, who has been leading the fight to get internet providers to do more to police the internet and protect children from pornography. She squared up to Nicholas Lansman of the Internet Service Providers Association - surprise, surprise, none of the big ISPs seemed keen to put their heads above the parapet.

The discussion did not really focus on the practicalities of blocking The Pirate Bay - which many in the internet industry believe will be ineffective - but on the responsibility of ISPs in general to act against any illegality online.

Mrs Perry, who wants internet users to have to opt in to access to pornography, insisted that this was not about web censorship of the kind we see in Burma or China but about giving parents the ability to protect children. Mr Lansman pointed out that his industry was giving consumers the filtering tools to block access to pornographic material, but was not keen to impose their use, or to end up policing the internet.

The Pirate Bay screenshot The Pirate Bay is hosted in Sweden

Now there's little doubt that Mrs Perry speaks for a wide strand of public opinion which would like to see internet firms be more proactive in child protection. The Daily Mail, with its instinct for Middle England's concerns, has given her campaign vigorous backing.

But just look at the reaction on Twitter and in emails to this morning's debate, and you will see a rather different view. Many believed the discussion showed a fundamental lack of understanding of the internet, and some that it was the job of parents, not ISPs, to block children's access to unsuitable internet sites. "You want DIY stores to be responsible for what buyers of crowbars do with them," asked one tweeter.

And as for the Pirate Bay blocking orders, there was widespread outrage online at the very idea that the music industry should act to stop consumers getting access to copyright material. "UK ISP blocking of #piratebay is the beginning of the end - equivalent to China's censorship policy. What's next?" read one message.

In summary, there is a gulf opening up between two views of the internet. On the one side, you've got those who feel strongly that there needs to be far more effective regulation, with action to block access to certain websites, and child protection trumping any concerns about censorship.

On the other, a libertarian strand online is opposed to any limits on how individuals use the internet, and views action to prevent access to copyright material or pornography as not only ineffective but morally wrong.

On some issues - notably government plans for greater web surveillance - some of the pro-regulation camp will shift to the libertarian side. But, as media firms step up their battle against piracy and popular newspapers demand action from politicians on web filtering, the internet culture wars are going to get more heated.

Rory Cellan-Jones Article written by Rory Cellan-Jones Rory Cellan-Jones Technology correspondent

Zuckerberg - the unasked questions

Mark Zuckerberg's appearance at the Mobile World Congress was a missed opportunity.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Rory


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 3.

    Mrs Perry MP and those who support her are fundamentally wrong. It is the responsibility of parents to police their children's behaviour. By all means require ISPs to provide parents with necessary tools, but taking away parents' responsibilities is what got us into this mess of a dependant society.

  • rate this

    Comment number 2.

    I thought the most interesting thing about the debate on Today was the utter lack of an opposing viewpoint, why wasn't an articulated opposing view invited to dispel alot of the ill-informed rubbish that was being spouted, especially by the interviewer?

    And why was porn constantly being equated with copyright infringement, a pretty poor effort by R4 Today all around.

  • rate this

    Comment number 5.

    I just listened to the audio clip, the host (John Humphrys?) seemed horribly under-informed and for a host in a debate had a remarkably biased opinion. It was a shame that Mr Lansman put up such a week defence/response to the criticisms.

  • rate this

    Comment number 4.

    Govmnts & companies always appeal to our fears by over emphasizing things we are afraid of and curtailing rights.You're statistically more likely to drown in the bath than be killed by a terrorist but increased stop and search powers were granted with little opposition. It's the same with the 'protect kids from porn' argument. Education of MPs & parents about the 'net is the answer, not censorship

  • rate this

    Comment number 16.

    I actively monitor what my children view and furthermore by using OpenDNS filter 99% of all bad content. As a parent it is MY responsibility to police what my children see on the Internet not the ISP or a Government... This banning of Piratebay is like putting your thumb over a fire hydrant....pointless, it's aimed at vote winning and a nod to the archaic music industry, which needs a revamp


Comments 5 of 51



Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.