LOS ANGELES—Forbes has reported on a study by the Open Rights Group, a UK-based anti-censorship group that decided to test the various systems in operation at UK ISPs, in which it "attempted to access 100,000 sites using either the default filter settings provided by the network, or with their 'normal' level of filtering where none was set by default."
The results were rather startling. Out of the 100,000 checked, ORG "found that nearly 20,000 sites were blocked by at least one ISP—many, as you’d expect from the sheer number involved, perfectly innocuous."
On a website set up by the group that contains a handy feature that lets you check to see if a site is blocked in the UK, returning results by internet service provider, the organization states, "The government is promoting filters to prevent children and young people from seeing content that is supposed to be for over 18s. This includes pornography and sites that talk about alcohol, smoking, anorexia and hate speech.
"In practice," they add, "filters block many sites that are not harmful to children. Sometimes, they are blocked by mistake. Sometimes, they are blocked deliberately. For example, many blogs and forums are blocked by default."
On the other hand, some of the people who are complaining about being blocked are not being blocked. For instance, Forbes spoke with Maureen Shaw, founder and editor-in-chief of the sherights.com blog, who is quoted as saying, "If people who would normally be interested in accessing our content—which focuses on reproductive healthcare, violence against women and LGBT rights—are not able to view the site, it directly impacts our bottom line.
"But, more than that," she added, "we are concerned with the message that blocking our site sends: that pro-woman, pro-equality, pro-human rights subject matter is somehow offensive, inappropriate or otherwise problematic.”
That might lead one to believe that sherights.com is blocked by at least one UK ISP, but such is not the case. According to the ORG test, none of the ISPs is currently or has ever blocked the site.
Many sites are blocked by the ISPs, however, including AVN.com, which, according to the ORG test, is available via AAISP and Plusnet, but not through BT, EE, O2, Sky, TalkTalk, Three, Virgin Media and Vodaphone. AVN, which of course covers the adult entertainment industry, does not allow sexually explicit content on the site, though it does allow nudity that does not include genitalia.
The fluidity of this situation is not without its curious moments. The Forbes piece also takes note of "the highly entertaining Order Order blog," who owner, Paul Staines, is quoted as pleading, “We would really appreciate it if TalkTalk would remove us from their block list. The only people who block us are them, and the Chinese government.”
A quick check just now indicates that TalkTalk, which was apparently the only UK ISP to block the politics-focused blog, unblocked it as of... today, at 14:33:15, telling us first that the ORG tool works splendidly, and also that TalkTalk is very sensitive to the media, perhaps because, as AVN has previously noted, its “Homesafe” filtering system is "controlled by the controversial Chinese company Huawei," lending more than a little irony to Staines comment above. Indeed, he might want to now check to see if his blog is now accessible in China, though one suspects the answer will be no.
As vigilant as people need to now be regarding the potential blocking of their sites by one or all of the ISPs—because there is no national standard regarding specifically which sites are to be blocked or not—the government is now considering outlawing so-called "revenge porn" sites, a move that could add yet another level of subjectivity to the current decision-making processes undertaken by the individual ISPs.
And of course, the possibility yet remains that the United Kingdom will move forward with plans to "make anyone aiming to view porn online prove that they are over 18 years of age through new requirements for website owners," or even, as one government advisor suggested last year, to move all porn sites into the .xxx top-level domain.
Presumably, any site that failed to follow either mandate would be made invisible across all ISPs, even if the subscriber wanted, and was of age to access it, or shuttered altogether.
