Blocking porn to kids isn’t panic

I’ve never quite understood the response of so-called ‘freespeech campaigners’ to laws that restrict access to porn online. In Issue 507 (News, page 9) you quote one such person, Jerry Barnett, who seems to suggest that placing 18+ age blocks on porn sites is an affront to democracy. What hysterical hogwash! Does he think that about the TV watershed? Or adult magazines being on the top shelf of a newsagent? Or 18 classifications for the cinema?

What is it about the internet that makes people cry ‘freedom of speech’ every five minutes? This isn’t about undermining people’s rights. Unless I’ve misread the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 15-year-olds can’t claim they are persecuted just because they won’t have unfettered access to porn online.

I accept that some computer-savvy teenagers will find ways around the porn block. Enterprising and curious teenagers have always looked for ways to bend the rules, whether that’s sneaking into cinemas or getting someone else to buy adult magazines for them. But that’s not an excuse for not trying to make it harder for them.

I find it ironic that Mr Barnett has written a book called Porn Panic! (ranked 315,298 in Amazon’s bestseller list, by the way). I assume he means that the Government and charities like the NSPCC are “panicking” by wanting to protect children from images that could warp their view of sexual relationships. But it sounds like he’s the one panicking, by turning this into an issue of free speech.

The description for the book attacks “a new social conservatism” for censoring porn. Again, that sounds like panic. Child campaigners don’t want to stigmatise sex; they just want to make sure it’s not freely available to children. Is that conservative, or merely responsible?

A