The government is launching a review of the porn industry – here’s what that means

Source: cosmopolitan.com 12/8/23

The porn industry is to be scrutinised as part of a government review that hopes to tackle abuse, exploitation, and the harmful impact of pornography, it has been announced.

From human trafficking to illegal pornography and questions around age limitations when it comes to accessing to graphic content, efforts into how to tackle the dangers associated with the online sex industry has been something women’s charities have long been calling for.

The Pornography Review, which has been announced by the government on 1 December, follows the passing of the much-delayed Online Safety Act earlier this year which introduced tighter regulation around online harms, including deepfakes, trolling and bullying.

It will be led by Baroness Gabby Bertin, who will assess the prevalence and impact viewing illegal pornography has on users of all ages, including on viewers’ attitudes towards violence against women and girls.

The review will also assess the “emerging challenges from AI generated pornography”, such as deepfake pornography – often created without consent – as well as considerations around whether current legal frameworks are in place to effectively tackle illegal pornographic content.

Regulatory body Ofcom will be enforcing new rules that will aim to stop children accessing explicit content.

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

57 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Beyond checks of age but perhaps with facial recognition software…the UK may let that fly but that is intrusion onto the person by the gov’t (and a big reason why King George was told to pound sand long ago).

Good!! Pornography is more addictive than heroin and that’s why the porn industry is making millions and millions of euros.
Some people and governments try to justify it as art because it is big business ( and some of them lustully enjoy looking at it themselves), but true art has NO age limit.

With all the technical sophistication the government has at it’s fingertips; wouldn’t US citizens expect their government to filter any illegal porn off the off the internet.

I am in Louisiana. About a year ago, Act 440 was put in place here which effectively blocks porn web sites when you are attempting to access them while in Louisiana. Basically, whenever you type in the web address of the porn site, instead of seeing the site’s home page, you see a page that says something like “Louisiana state law now requires us to put in place a process for verifying the age of users who connect to our site”. There is usually then a link provided to a different website that can verify your identity. This verification is much more than simply checking a box saying that you are an adult. Rather, these verification sites require either a photo of your Louisiana drivers license and/or an actual photo of yourself that is taken by your laptop or cellphone camera by the verification site at that moment. The verification process can also access something called “LA Wallet”, which provides to the online verification site a digital copy of your drivers license, vaccination records, virtual court appearances, hunting & fishing licenses, etc.
Once you are verified as an adult by this third party site, you are given a username and password which then can be used to access the porn site. Most of these verification sites are free, however some require a credit card and will charge $.01 to prove you are indeed an adult. So, in order to view porn in Louisiana, these verification sites will now have your drivers license info, a photo of you, and perhaps even a credit card number, and perhaps much much more info about you.
But not all porn sites even bother with the verification process. Some porn sites simply state that a new Louisiana law prohibits their website from being accessed in Louisiana, and no alternative is given. You can’t access the site.
This Louisiana law can result in fines of $5000 per day for a porn site that is in violation, plus an additional $10,000 per violation, per the language in the legislation.
Some lawsuits have been filed, but in October, a porn industry group lost its challenge to this new law in a US District Court.

Great for Britain! A country doesn’t have to be a dictatorship that tramples on freedoms to regulate the porn industry. Too bad we don’t have these laws in the US, because it’s very easy to find cp mixed in with adult porn. It’s a trap for viewers who get drawn into looking at younger stuff. If we’re going to have these draconian laws that send people to prison for viewing obscene material, we should make it hard to access it thru the adult online porn industry that needs to be severely regulated, or shut down completely.

“86% of Americans have… tried BDSM at least once…” (Source: Bedbible Research Center, Aug 24, 2023).  “…36 percent of adults in the United States use masks, blindfolds and bondage tools during sex. Worldwide that number is only 20 percent.” (Source: Smithsonian Magazine, Feb 1, 2014).

The only way we can save this perverted, addicted majority is by outlawing their porn. It fuels their sick imagination. We all know violent predators watch this stuff. What more reasoning do we need? And while we’re at it, let’s ban those brain-eating Hallmark movies.

So long as Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), remains a U.S. Supreme Court precedent, pornography, no matter how graphic it is, will remain legal in the United States so long as it is possible that it has even a smidgen of “socially redeeming value” and possesses even a modicum of “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”. The notable exception to this is child pornography, which is obscene under any legal standard.

The big problem with the Miller case is that it is all in the eye of the beholder. What is pornography to some people is clearly not pornographic to others. I’m not a big fan of pornography, mainly because it was a horrible pornography addition that got me into legal trouble in the first place, but I’d be the last one to say that it should be banned in this country. So long as, in the eyes of someone, it can have social redeeming value and has some serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, it should be legal to create and possess.

Of course, the Miller test might end up going the way of Roe v. Wade given the current nature of the Supreme Court. It doesn’t seem to respect long-standing precedents very much. Ban porn and we go down a slippery slope. What’s next? Banning Huckleberry Finn because of it’s flagrant but absolutely necessary repeated use of the word “nigger”?

These British enquiries are always led by some “Baroness.” Once again, they continue to prove my point that we, Stateside, have much to be thankful for in our First Amendment.