Shared publicly  - 
 
Today's front page: Victorious! Two great results from your campaigning newspaper

Campaign one: Arctic Convoy heroes WILL get their medals http://bit.ly/VSYieH

Campaign two: Children WILL be protected from online porn http://bit.ly/VRtlXX
4
Kate Allan's profile photoMalcolm Saunders's profile photoRyan Barlow's profile photoDaniel Fairclough's profile photo
15 comments
 
A sad day for the internet in Britain :( very sad. Now all those sellers of dark and sinister materials will change their URL's faster than they can keep up with it, they will adapt and find ways around it. 

Who is going to decide what is and isn't suitable for the children ? I've said it before, here in Saudi showing a woman in an advert is considered unsuitable, we have no moral right to tell them what to view, nor they have to tell us, so what gives this appointed arbiter of morality the right to tell us what our children can and cannot see and by DEFAULT tell us what we can and cannot see.

I'm reminded of my experience with Vodafone, when I first used internet over 3g, they had filtering on by default, and I couldn't view games information about Call of Duty because the filter said it was not suitable material. So I called up vodafone, asked for this filter to be removed, to be told by some young idiot customer service guy "OH, YOU WANT TO SURF PORN DO YOU?" .. 

Errr . NO .. I want to use the internet without YOU deciding what is and isn't moral for me to view. 

The site actually only contained mild swear words, that was the cause, but I can see a lot of worry and miss understanding about this filter, and a lot of things filtered which have no real moral hazards.

Today they will filter morality, tomorrow they will filter political debate and opinion !! We are becoming more like China every day .. I do not recognise the country I once was proud to call my own.
 
The only way to protect kids from online porn is for parents to monitor what they are looking at . IE not letting them have PC in bedroom. Having laptops & pc's & pads where the parent can constantly see what kids are looking at instead of using the internet as a babysitter. When I was a kid we were'nt allowed to watch violent tv shows. Its parents that buy violent Games & movies for their children. Its fairly simple to block certain sites on a computer in security settings. Its parents that need educating.
 
Doesn't the Daily Mail claim to be a newspaper? If it is a lobby organisation it should send out its stuff free to persuade people to support it. Sad that we have garbage press.
 
Malcolm I agree With Lisa & yourself. I started reading the DM 20 years ago when it was a semi decent paper now it is full of Celeb rubbish Iphone advertising not to mention self rightous posturing on important issues. There is no need to block anything as there are already ways around blocks. Has blocking Piratebay stopped people accessing its sites. Err no. The people running websites like piratebay for instance are far more intelligent than Journos or politicians.
 
Ugh... We had one of these at work and breast cancer sites, women only spas and women gyms like Curves were all concidered porn. Basically if it had "Woman" in the address or "Breast" it was blocked. Even some clothes stores that had underware were blocked. I remember there was one girls computer that allowed you to go to the Next website so on our lunches we would order stuff from her computer ... Sometimes there would even be a line lol! Poor girl had to start telling people it was blocked so she could eat in peace.
All that's going to happen IMO is everyone is going to get it removed and all this will be a pointless waste of money. I guess if your a politician it gets the monkey off your back so they have more time to figure out how to steal more money from the tax payers to fund their moat cleaning. 
 
Wow the daily mail has campaigned for years to get the government to recognize the brave soldiers who served the country in the most severe of conditions and all you muppets can do is knock it for trying to stop kids from watching porn.
 
The point is +Ryan Barlow that newspapers report the news and lobbying organisations do campaigns. The DM does not appear to have any idea what news is. It is free to do whatever campaigns it wants, but it shouldn't be doing them on the pretence of being a newspaper.
 
No that's just something made up in your head, do you think it was wrong for the Daily
Mail to campaign for the accused murderers of Stephen Lawrence to face justice or that MPs should be more open with their accounts?. Or is it because you don't agree with this campaign you think its wrong?
The daily mail can campaign for whatever it likes its a private company its not paid for by the taxpayer it is under no obligation to be unbiased.

Newspapers do not just print the news never have done and never will every newspaper has an agenda and puts its own slant on a story and prints it accordingly to how it thinks its readers will react to the story. The same piece of news will be completely different in the guardian compared to the sun.

If people don't like what the daily mail prints then people will not buy it but as it is the second best selling newspaper in the country after The Sun then a lot of people must agree with it. 
 
Ryan are you on the payroll mate ? I would take them seriously if they didn't use so much space on celeb gossip instead of serious news including semi naked pics of celebs with their enviable (sic) bikini bodies. The campaign is a good idea if it wasn't possible for idiot parents to secure the tech in their own homes for kids to use safely as I & many already do effectively. 
 
I am not arguing about the validity of the campaign I am arguing about the papers right to campaign.
 
My not arguing their right to campaign just the hypocrisy & that it would best pointless if parents accepted their own responsibility for protecting THIER children instead of the nanny state. 
 
I am not arguing with you I was replying to the post above mine stating that no newspaper has a right to campaign for issues it believes in.

Which is simply bollocks.
 
If you buy a child an tablet or phone that connects it to the net you need as a parent to put systems in place to protect that child from harmful images movies & words that can upset or makers their thinking in a variety of matters the same way as protecting against viruses & such. My parents did this 30 years ago by not letting us watch programmes like stealth &hutch the proffesionals.,the Sweeney because they we're adult programmes violent &not suitable for kids. We we're not allowed a TV in our room till we we're old enough. We we're not allowed to watch the movie grease when it came out as it was not for children. We thought that those things we're ok because other kids were allowed to watch. My parents protected us
 
Parents use TV & computers to babysit the kids. It's the parents fault that their kids watch or view porn. Why should ADULTS have to circumvent to appease idiot parents who can't be bothered to parent
Add a comment...