”… actually a social issue of the greatest importance…”

What is..?

Well, according to Baroness Kidron, it’s that eeeeeeevil Internet and its effect on the poor helpless kiddiewinks.

At iRights’ heart are five principles: that under-18s should be able to take down any content they have posted on the internet; that they should have a right to know who is holding or profiting from their information; that they should be able to explore the internet safely; that there should be safeguards on compulsive technologies such as gaming; and that they should be educated to best know how to navigate their way online.

OK, in order, then:

1) Shouldn’t anyone be able to do this, if we’re going to bring it in at all (which we can’t)? Why limit it to under-18s?
2) How would such a ‘right’ be exercised – have you considered the practicalities?
3) Why assume that they currently can’t, then, should they just take some personal responsibility?
4) There already are – what more do you think are required?
5) Good luck with that, they can’t seemingly be educated to read & write, never mind anything else!

And of course all this is just the usual incoherent demand that somebody DO SOMETHING! that we’ve heard so many times before, over so many other moral panics. Long on emotion, short on practicality.

Lady Kidron doesn’t want new legislation, describing the European Court of Justice’s ruling on the “right to be forgotten” that sparked an avalanche of requests to delete web links as “very complicated”. Instead, she hopes a movement grows up to make web owners – including Facebook, which is “interested” in the project – think.

“The best way I have of explaining it is that if you think what it was like with diversity in the boardroom 10 years ago – nobody gave a shit, nobody thought it was a problem. Now you can do it well, you can do it willingly, you can do it not at all, but everybody has to think about it.”

Do we..? Do we really? And just how does that help?

7 comments for “”… actually a social issue of the greatest importance…”

  1. ivan
    November 18, 2014 at 10:33 am

    So this is another idiot that doesn’t know how the internet works wanting to play nanny.

    Rather than looking at the children she would be better off looking at the parents and trying to get them to take responsibility for what their kids do on the internet.

  2. Hereward unbowed.
    November 18, 2014 at 2:12 pm

    Some pretty savage things are said on t’ net, however you don’t have to read them and I can’t help but feel that kids these days are a tad over sensitive.
    I went to a school, where the bumps and bruises were real, during sport, games as we all called it and on the playground during break where the footie was always rough and occasionally outright dangerous.
    Dangerously out of order – were the verbal barbs, the ‘skitting’ [as we used to call it].
    Skitting, was barbaric at times – everything goes and no stone left unturned. My alma mater, it was a grammar school, kids were quite inventive with invective and ‘colourful’ with it and so cruel, very cruel but it happened and it was pretty dire when it was your ‘turn’ – kids are like that.
    It made you grow up, life is hard and people are not always sympathetic no matter how undeserving of it, you are.

    And yet, “it’s that eeeeeeevil Internet and its effect on the poor helpless kiddiewinks.”

    This is all about , taming the internet and Lordy! Another baroness ‘making a name for herselfshire’ [Common Purpose?] is doing the work of the Internet censors sitting in Brussels – now I want you to think of an example not Brussels but think……….clamping censorship and of Peking and China.

    • November 27, 2014 at 1:58 pm

      Inventive, colourful invective, eh? Sheer luxury. When I were a lad we had to share the same old, worn out insults that our dad had when he were a lad.

  3. Ed P
    November 18, 2014 at 10:25 pm

    Another bloody interfering do-gooder! I feel like starting a counter-pressure group called MyRights (gotta have an embedded capital letter or de kidz won’t take note), to tell these control freaks to sod off.

    It’s simple: if you don’t like what you see, stay away. Sorted.

  4. Andrew Duffin
    November 21, 2014 at 9:38 am

    Seeing as most “kids” (ie under 25 or so) can’t even be arsed to put PIN numbers on their phonemail, they certainly aren’t going to bother with Mrs. Nanny and her “education”.

    “Butt out, Grandma”, will be the polite version of their response.

  5. November 27, 2014 at 1:56 pm

    The kiddiwinks who need to be told are the same kiddiewinks who never listen to anything they are told.

Comments are closed.