Non ascolto la radio molto spesso, ma spesso è in casa perché lo fanno altri membri della famiglia. Ho preso la coda di una discussione tra Justin McCarthy e il capo delle politiche e degli affari pubblici al cessate (al centro per porre fine a tutti gli sfruttamenti sessuali). Stavano parlando dell’Atto di sicurezza online del Regno Unito che è qualcosa di cui molte persone hanno più che probabilmente il vento da quando è stato implementato il 25 luglio. Ho intenzione di collegare il segmento Qui (Inizia alle 43:00 in quanto non sembra esserci una funzione Timestamp), solo per chiunque sia interessato può avere un ascolto e avere la propria visione.
Prefazione; Sì, capisco che la cessazione è focalizzata sulla limitazione della facilità di accesso alla pornografia per i bambini, quindi non discuteranno anche della soppressione di altre forme di media in questo divieto.
Tuttavia, la rotazione che è stata posta sull’intera situazione è mentale. I bambini di età compresa tra 7 e 10 anni sono spesso menzionati durante l’intervista e il relatore ospite afferma che l’Atto di sicurezza online del Regno Unito è progettato per proteggere quei bambini "Accesso al contenuto pornagrafico". Tuttavia, non vi è a malapena alcun input di McCarthy su qualsiasi critica dell’atto, a parte una breve domanda sui bambini esperti di tecnologia che potrebbero essere in grado di aggirare le restrizioni usando una VPN.
Penso che i bambini dovrebbero vedere la merda che fanno su Twitter? No, certo che no. La quantità di più NSFW rispetto al solito contenuto su lì è salita alle stelle da quando Musk ha preso il sopravvento. Tuttavia, sono rimasto sorpreso dalla mancanza di qualsiasi menzione del ruolo della genitorialità nella situazione. Non so se questa sia una visione obsoleta, ma sicuramente i bambini di quelle età (e più vecchi?) Non dovrebbero nemmeno essere su Twitter in primo luogo, figuriamoci senza supervisione.
L’argomento più accetta che non è stato menzionato era la capacità di essere usata per essere usata completamente per soffocare completamente qualsiasi contenuto ritenuto "sensibile" dal governo del Regno Unito. Ci sono già state affermazioni in cui i video delle proteste vengono censurati perché "Protesta = scene violente". Non c’era menzione di questo "Appena" La pornografia è stata censurata durante l’intera discussione, in cui mi sento come se sia la principale obiezione che le persone hanno a una legislazione ampia come questa attuata.
Come ho detto prima, non ascolto molto questi spettacoli, quindi non ho familiarità con il livello di discussione o interrogare gli host che usano di solito quando parleranno con un ospite. Tuttavia, questo si è rivelato un completo imbiancatura dell’intera situazione e si è persino concluso con l’ospite che raccomandava di implementare lo stesso livello di censura.
Disappointing display of journalism on RTÉ Radio 1 today regarding the UK's Online Safety Act.
byu/EliteDinoPasta inireland
di EliteDinoPasta
20 commenti
It’s a significant lurch to authoritarianism, and not finished. Check r/unitedkingdom for the latest developments. IDs, banning so called “barely legal” themed material. It’s quite bonkers. And because politicians love playing to the crowd citing safety of children etc they’ll probably be cooking up something Ill conceived.
> and even ended with the guest recommending that the same level of censorship be implemented here.
it is legally is already but the implementation has been different , https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2022/act/41/enacted/en/html Online Safety and Media Regulation Act 2022 , thats why Coimisiún na Meán exists
https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-culture-communications-and-sport/publications/online-safety-and-media-regulation-act-2022/
due to EU directive which is coming into force this year https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/audiovisual-and-media-services
It’s worse than you can possibly imagine…
[https://youtu.be/RFUUy0DKxvk](https://youtu.be/RFUUy0DKxvk)
I understand concerns about state overreach but a law making online platforms responsible for not showing pornography (much of it violent and gross) to children is not censorship. If sex shops were selling extreme videos to 12 year olds or if RTE had clips of hard core porn on at 1pm people would be rightly outranged and the companies would be held accountable. Yet online platforms do absolutely nothing to protect children and we know that exposure to pornography is really harmful.
You can oppose state overreach when you have clear evidence of that. But please do not act like it’s unreasonable to prevent children accessing porn.
I too was listening to this, trapped in the car and didnt want to listen to Spin Radio…
It was presented in a way that triggered / reminded me of a Fox news opinion piece, though to be fair I dont disagree with their objectives, but the way they want go about it, is an ecrochment on our citizens rights.
It was a sickingly slick presentaton, and I was very disappointed to see such a piece of deftly spin doctrored material on RTE. It really marked a new low, even for them, in my opinion…
At this point the way the regulations are being framed, particularly the myopic focus on porn, is just a direct reflection of the _majority_ of criticism those regulations are facing and what the _overwhelming majority_ of people are encountering them as. It being an obviously transparent attempt to de-anonymise the internet is a secondary or even tertiary concern to the majority of people and as far as I can tell the uptake, in terms of people handing over their info or finding workarounds that engage with the system as is rather than bypassing it, is fairly high because many of those users (even those who are finding work arounds like using pictures of video game characters) aren’t particularly tech savvy and are willing to do whatever is necessary to access what they’re after.
The UK wasn’t the first country to implement this, it won’t be the last, and you would do well to realise that this is going to happen on some level just about everywhere. As it stands the internet has changed repeatedly over the past two decades largely driven by new and more invasive ways to exploit or manipulate its users, it just took governments a significant amount of time to reasonably catch up and begin implementing regulations. I feel like as it stands the DSA in the EU and what the OSA is in the UK are just very early drafts that are probably more permissive and more porous than what is going to be implemented in the future.
Oi oi, yu got a loicense for that wank sir?
They’ll be pushing for it here soon too. It has nothing to do with safety but silencing dissent.
All those policies masked as protection of children is nothing more than yet another unnecessary level of Internet control… I don’t know if things are getting worse or not in general. But the Internet is certainly getting worse.
This is why most people subscribe to the Business Post.
We’re way past the net neutrality ideal.
Internet content is massively manipulated by a few social media companies, and operating in plain sight we have algorithms pushing extreme right/left content to drive engagement, election interference, propaganda etc etc.
It’s an absolute clusterf*ck.
I am becoming in favour of internet laws to manage what people see.
In Ireland your morals in the bedroom must always align with those dictated by those with influence in the media and government policy. In the past it was about the Catholic faith. Now I’m not sure what the faith is but those imposing it look a lot like those who came before them. Holy Catholic Ireland isn’t dead. It has just been rebranded as a lobby group.
As soon as you invoke the safety of children, critical thinking goes out the window. Which I am sure the framers of this legislation were only too well aware of.
This isn’t a comment on the rights and wrongs of this but I think the average Reddit poster haven’t internalised just how popular these poll. Politicians aren’t doing it out of nowhere.
McCarthy’s a wrongun, RTÉ’s token conservative
If it’s any more technical than changing a light bulb, the typical Irish journalist is lost completely.
I think that in a way, it does prevent early exposure to p*rnography. But there are two issues. 1. tech companies promoting this content to children, which is a worse issue. And 2. The data goes to a third party american company, which is less strict on privacy.
Firstly its nonsense to think pushing a few big content providers to add age verification makes the Internet a safe place for kids, its absolutely wild. Its absolutely a parenting and controlling access thing.
Secondly now we are making databases on people and there proclivities. I wonder where can that go wrong?
I was waiting for your last line – a recommendation that it should be implemented here… The purpose of a system is what it does.
This is the type of shit that busy body politicians do so they don’t have to fix actual problems.
It’s coming here. Sounds like something Helen mcentee would be interested in.
Maybe parents should actually bother to control their kids online. And if we actually held the companies accountable, they would implement tools to aid parents in doing this.