Whilst a few have been very vociferous in the campaign against the recent attempts by the government to control and censor the internet, a huge majority have been doing no more than tut into their tea and sleep walk into a very restrictive era. Do not underestimate how much power the ‘little man’ has when he makes the effort. Our name is Legion, for we are many. We have enormous strength if we pull together. Use social media to spread the message, attend protests, sign and circulate the petitions (Change.org and HM Govt e-petition) and write to your MP.
Here are my latest missives to Harriet Harman. Write to your MP now! You can find out who they are here. Feel free to use these emails as inspiration but it’s best to use your own words.
Sent today:
Dear Ms Harman
It seems the new ATVOD regulations are more sinister than first appears since they seek to control all video on demand using an undefined definition of “TV-like” which being “interpreted dynamically” overly widely (read: Let’s see what we can get away with by picking on the little people and setting precedents). They are also seeking to deter banks from processing payments from non-UK companies that make material available here. This is clearly an unacceptable interference in cross-border trading and most probably in breach of EU regulations.
Moving back to the protection of children on the net, there is an interesting statement from the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP) on their web site which points out the extent to which the new legislation is an over-kill and misguided:
LOS ANGELES (April 25, 2014) — After careful study separating the facts from the rhetoric, the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP) wishes to clarify its stance on ATVOD’s push to mandate age verification systems for adult oriented websites.
ATVOD, the U.K.’s Authority on Television and Video On Demand, is petitioning the British government, seeking the imposition of technical measures to prevent minors from accessing age inappropriate content online. ATVOD is pursuing initiatives that restrict payment processing options for adult entertainment sites — and is moving to make age verification systems (AVS) the law of the land.
Not content with regulating the domestic U.K. adult entertainment industry, ATVOD seeks to project its control over websites wherever they are hosted, if they are available in the U.K. — which is a move affecting countless website operators, including many of ASACP’s sponsors.
While ATVOD’s efforts may seek to make the Internet safer for children, which is the core goal of ASACP and its mission of keeping children out of and away from age inappropriate content, the association believes that the proposed age verification measures are overbroad, and do not address the most important factor in this equation — the role of the parent.
ATVOD also seeks to block a broad range of material from UK citizens that may go far further than just adult entertainment content. Just as the recent UK parental filters turned out to block content ranging from non-erotic nudity to sex education, so this new bill can be expected to be overly broad in its definition of adult entertainment content.
I agree with ASACP, it is the job of parents, and all users, to apply the level of censorship they feel appropriate at an individual level. I do not feel parenting is the role of the state, nor should it make antediluvian moral decisions for the public . State censorship defined by a quango with frontline decisions being made by profit-oriented third party contractors is a recipe for disaster. I have heard that there are possible breaches of the Data Protection Act by ATVOD which might affect the validity of their evidence and it seems they have no data to verify their ‘For Adults Only? Underage access to online porn‘ report. We have already seen the trouble in the parking industry caused by revenue hungry contractors and rules being ignored, with NoToMob forcing them to refund around £2m as a result and some withdrawing CCTV car operations entirely. I think they could be heading into similar territory.
Then, of course, there is the Obscene Publications Act which attempts to be the safety net but one must be aware that this was enacted in a different era, 18 years even before homosexuality was legal. If moral judgements, with no empirical support that they do protect the children, are to be made, they should be in the light of current moral standards, not those of a by-gone unenlightened age. In any case, proving the material “depraves and corrupts” is well-nigh impossible, so much escapes the law. Thus, the act is largely unfit for purpose.
As you have no doubt noticed, this ill-conceived knee-jerk legislation is getting a lot of negative press and even Mr Clegg objects to it. The public is clearly against it, even though they have yet to realise the full implications hidden under the smoke-screen of porn and the false colours of “Protect the children!”. I trust you will show up this attempt by the Tory Taliban to bind and gag the public, with no visible means of withdrawing consent, for what it is.
Did you receive my earlier email below? I can’t find a reply.
Regards
Sent: 03 December 2014 16:15
To: ‘harmanh@parliament.uk’
Subject: Regulations for Video On Demand Pornography (AMSR 2014)
Dear Ms Harman
The recent legislation which attempts to restrict content UK adults sites in an effort to protect children seems to be very misguided and ineffective. It appears to be more about raising a licence fee than anything practical as it only relates to UK pay sites.
I can imagine the kids it claims to protect will be accessing free sites rather than those that require one to be of sufficient age and creditworthiness to hold a payment card! I hear many have their dummy exchanged for a mobile these days but I rather assume credit cards come a little later. In any case, the legislation seems to be somewhat patriarchal in that female pleasures are deemed illegal, yet equivalent male ones are not. It even goes so far as to deny and outlaw female ejaculation which seems a pretty well established fact in this day and age. If you aren’t up to speed, Myles Jackson, a specialist lawyer, explains here: http://obscenitylawyer.blogspot.co.uk There has already been a victory by a very spirited and erudite lady, who I have the honour of knowing, who runs an art project/female supremacy site, The Urban Chick Supremacy Cell. Here’s her story: http://obscenitylawyer.blogspot.co.uk/2014_08_01_archive.html
As one who seems fairly liberal, can I assume you oppose this legislation? Should this not be the case, I’d appreciate it if you would share your reasons.
Regards