LETTER:The Internet publishes - and is damned
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.From Mr Colin Tully
Sir: In his letter about the Internet, Jim Moody tells us the action taken in Germany [to force CompuServe to ban access to newsgroups that discuss sexual matters] is "dangerous". Which is the greater danger: zealots' pain, or the exploitation and abuse of children?
We are told the Internet "should only ever be used by minors under adult supervision". Does Mr Moody inhabit the same reality as the rest of us, or only a virtual one? And "there is always the off switch". Why then regulate TV transmissions?
We are told that "a state authority has usurped the rights, duties and responsibilities of parents". I wonder how many parents know how to exercise them, or will now protest at being disempowered?
What's more, "technical help for parents already exists" by way of "a software filter". After 35 years in the software business, I do not find this as reassuring as Mr Moody evidently does.
We are told that "the Internet can no more be described as anarchic than the telephone system or the postal service or a bag of apples". The issue is not anarchy; it is the unsolicited distribution of pornography. This is discouraged by post or phone, so why not by the Internet?
Well, "those who post inappropriate material are dealt with expeditiously by their peers, their fellow-users in each news group". Fellow pornographers (and bomb makers) are no doubt specially expeditious.
The Internet is a splendid achievement, but it is naive to suppose that it carries no risk, or that management of the risk should be left to the zealots.
Yours,
Colin Tully
Tunbridge Wells, Kent
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments