Ich höre nicht sehr oft Radio, aber es ist oft im Haus, weil es andere Familienmitglieder tun. Ich habe das Schwanzende einer Diskussion zwischen Justin McCarthy und dem Leiter Politik und öffentlichen Angelegenheiten bei Cease (Zentrum zur Beendigung der gesamten sexuellen Ausbeutung) erwischt. Sie sprachen über das britische Online -Sicherheitsgesetz, das viele Menschen mehr als wahrscheinlich auf den Wind haben, seit es am 25. Juli umgesetzt wurde. Ich werde das Segment verknüpfen Hier (Es beginnt um 43:00 Uhr, da es keine Zeitstempelfunktion zu geben scheint), nur damit jeder Interessierte zuhören und seine eigene Sicht haben kann.
Vorwort; Ja, ich verstehe, dass die Aufhscherung darauf ausgerichtet ist, den einfachen Zugang zu Pornografie für Kinder einzuschränken, sodass sie nicht auch über die Unterdrückung anderer Medienformen in diesem Verbot diskutieren.
Der Spin, der in der gesamten Situation platziert wurde mental. Kinder aus dem Alter von 7 bis 10 Jahren werden während des gesamten Interviews häufig erwähnt, und der Gastredner behauptet, dass das UK Online-Sicherheitsgesetz für Kinder vorhanden ist "Zugriff auf pornagraphische Inhalte". Es gibt jedoch kaum einen Beitrag von McCarthy zu einer der Kritikpunkte des Gesetzes, abgesehen von einer kurzen Frage zu technisch versierten Kindern, die möglicherweise die Beschränkungen mit einem VPN umgehen können.
Glaube ich, dass Kinder die Scheiße sehen sollten, die sie auf Twitter machen? Nein, natürlich nicht. Die Menge an mehr NSFW als übliche Inhalte dort ist seit der Übernahme der Musk in die Höhe geschossen. Ich war jedoch überrascht von dem Fehlen einer Erwähnung der Rolle der Elternschaft in der Situation. Ich weiß nicht, ob dies eine veraltete Sichtweise ist, aber sicherlich sollten Kinder dieser Altersgruppen (und älter?) Erstens nicht einmal auf Twitter sein, geschweige denn unbeaufsichtigt.
Das agregärere Thema, das auch nicht erwähnte "empfindlich" von der britischen Regierung. Es gab bereits Ansprüche, bei denen Videos von Proteste zensiert werden, weil "Protest = gewalttätige Szenen". Das wurde nicht erwähnt "Nur" Die Pornografie wurde während der gesamten Diskussion zensiert, wo ich das Gefühl habe, dass dies der Hauptangebot ist, den die Menschen in die Umsetzung der Gesetze wie dieser Einführung haben.
Wie ich bereits sagte, höre ich diese Shows nicht viel zu, daher bin ich nicht mit dem Ausmaß der Diskussion oder in Frage, die die Gastgeber üblich werden, wenn ich mit einem Gast spreche. Dies war jedoch eine vollständige Tünche der gesamten Situation und endete sogar damit, dass der Gast empfahl, hier das gleiche Zensurniveau umzusetzen.
Disappointing display of journalism on RTÉ Radio 1 today regarding the UK's Online Safety Act.
byu/EliteDinoPasta inireland
Von EliteDinoPasta
21 Kommentare
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.
There isn’t journalism on RTE, there’s agenda setting.
That’s what you heard.