Google, which had just gotten ready o make an announcement that any of the blogs which use any kind of pornographic content would be removed. However, they apparently had so many complaints that they have reversed their opinion, and will now allow pornographic blogs. I didn't even know that such things existed, and could have lived the rest of my kife without that knowledge. I think that people use the argument that they have the right to free speech, and I guess that now includes just about anything that a person wants to present on the internet. http://rt.com/news/236199-google-porn-ban-reversal/
Yes Tumble, I can believe this, more and more that argument has forced the majority of us to tolerate the few's opinion. Yet when we say that we don't want these things to be so readily available to our loved ones, we are told that we are infringing on their rights. And, yes I have heard that we, "don't have to view anything unless we wish to". But most of the time our young children don't have a clue as to what pornography is, much less understand why they should not see it. Shutting the bedroom door isn't enough anymore.
I don't think of it at all. I just don't go there. There was a time, a few years ago, when pornographic sites would pop up often, without anyone having sought them, but I don't see that anymore. It seems that, in today's Internet, the only people who are presented with pornographic content are those who are looking for it. While I consider that to be sad, I would rather have them included than have Google deciding what is or is not appropriate content, for there will come a time when they will not consider Christian content to be appropriate.
Free speech used to be qualified by saying that freedom of speech came with responsibily. The person issuing anything written or orated could be subject to suit. Now, unless some major faction such as the NAACP is offended all speech is good to go. As to the question, it's hard to answer. The internet is not like an adult book and novelty store whereby only adults are supposedly allowed to purchase pornography. The internet only asks if someone is of legal age and then whoever can enter onto the site. The "asking" phase does not ask for any proof of age, just has a disclaimer attached and that's about it. Because it is so easy for our youth to get onto these sites I do not believe it should be allowed. But, that being said, our Supreme Court has ruled that Pornographic pictures, movies ect are an art form so I guess writing would fit into that catagory also along with the free speech referendum. In short....No matter what I think, it will probably stay put until Google or whoever sees a real moral factor and fights off the dogs.
I agree that children should not be allowed to access such sites, and I wish that adults were sufficiently mature so as not to feel the need to. It is indeed a difficult question to answer and, except for those pathetic individuals who believe that children should have the right to access pornography, the choices come down to who it is who is supposed to control the access. I believe that this responsibility would most appropriately lie with the parents, who should not allow their children to have unfettered access to the Internet. Unfortunately, many schools and most libraries will not only allow children to access inappropriate material, but some (in the case of public libraries) feel that is is their mission to allow children to access such sites. It becomes difficult for parents to have complete control over these matters, particularly when their children attend public school. Homeschooling is the best option, but difficult for working parents to achieve since school serves a dual purpose as a daytime babysitter. Private schools are sometimes no better, and are also expensive, given that parents are also forced to support the public schools that they are not using. I do not believe that the responsibility should be that of the search engines but I do believe that any businesses that are running websites with pornographic content should be held responsible in the event that they allow a child to access the site. We would then find that there are ways to better secure a site from access by children and, since this would be expensive, we'd probably find that there are fewer such sites, and I wouldn't consider that to be a bad thing. Think of it. If I approach a twelve year-old with a pornographic magazine, it won't be enough for me to swear that I thought the kid was eighteen, or that the child told me s/he was eighteen. In fact, in the off-line world, even when the ages are closer together and an under-aged child appears to be older than he or she actually is, people have been held responsible. That's why grocery stores card people in their thirties before selling them cigarettes and, in fact, why you don't find cigarette machines anymore.
This is where good parenting comes in. In this day and age, children are going to see and hear a lot. They are going to be put in difficult situations. We need to start talking to our kids and explaining to them what it is, and why it's bad or unacceptable. And most importantly, how to handle themselves if they are ever in a bad situation. Preparing them beforehand may literally save them a world of grief. When my son was growing up, my brother-in-law smoked pot. He is a great guy, and a terrific uncle, but I didn't approve of his drugs. However, I never kept my son from seeing and interacting with him (as long as he wasn't high). I used it as a "life lesson", to teach my son what it was, why it was bad and we discussed what he should do if he was put into a situation where he was asked to take drugs. Education is the key to protecting our children, not censorship. They're going to be exposed to it, and I would much rather be the one to give them advice, rather than their friends or some "pervert" down the street.
Whether something is banned or not, there will always be a way for a person to find what he (or she) is looking for. I feel that instruction on making explosions or inducing suicide bombers is a lot worse.
The part I don't understand is that when I started a Blogspot blog (not sure whether there's a difference between Blogspot and Blogger) the contract very clearly said "no porn." (It also said "no hate or violence.") So who's been doing the pornographic blogs, did they e-sign the same contract, and if so why was the contract not enforced, long ago? I think censorship is worse than porn, but I also think sincere displays of affection (or passion) tend to be private ones.
My best guess is that the porn is hosted on private servers, as the blogging software can be used without such a contract. Censorship really only applies when it's the government doing the censoring.
Pornographic blogs? As so often happens I'm feeling a little in the dark here. I rather like it. Some things don't need to be seen. Surprised but not surprised. So many things tend to be borderline pornographic these days anyway. I don't even see how kids can be allowed to watch tv without constant supervision. Or music videos. Especially music videos. Good night! The entertainment industry sold out to the devil long ago.
Everyone picks what they want to write about and if they decide to write about pornographic blogs then it's their decision, and I'm fine with it...
Knowing Google and their ever changing algorithm, i'm not convince that they reversed their decision pertaining pornographic materials. I wonder for what reasons?
My broadband connection blocks any content unsuitable for people under the age of 18. I never bothered to remove that security lock so I never get to see anything pornographic. My point is that parents can set a block on adult content on any system that their child will use to access the Internet. There are also degrees of porn and what people consider to be porn. A blogging platform will not allow anything illegal, such as porn involving children or animals. Some people object to images of women wearing very little or no clothing, but that is not porn and children should not be stopped, for example, from viewing great works of art featuring female nudes or ancient nude sculptures of muscular young men.