Letter: Internet curbs

David Kerr
Wednesday 11 March 1998 20:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

IT IS an enigma that the glut of information on the Internet spawns growing paranoia about being starved of this commodity. Jason Burton (letter, 7 March) assumes that rating of content is about reducing the need for government to regulate the Internet, when there is no evidence of it seeking to control legal material.

Mr Burton is right to be concerned about any apparent means of restricting the free flow of information. However, in over a year of debate on this issue with governments, service providers and regulation bodies around the world, I have not come across any significant views that are not in the sole interests of protecting children and do not value the free speech of consenting adults. The beauty of the system we are working on is that it harnesses the technology to achieve both. The rating of the content is done by its producers, not third parties. The acceptance criteria are set by the user.

In fact the system as it already operates (RSACi ratings filtered through Internet Explorer 3) allows adult users to see everything, but to set limits for their offspring via password-controlled access. Personally I agree with Mr Burton that we should not be over-protective of our children, but that is my choice. Others are free to choose otherwise.

DAVID KERR

Chief Executive

Internet Watch Foundation

Oakington, Cambridgeshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in