Self-regulation of the internet - Revision history

The Admins at 10:40, 28 August 2023

2023-08-28T10:40:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:40, 28 August 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	__NOTOC__In the Western world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''[[Wikipedia:Industry self-regulation\|self-regulate]]''', to stay in accordance with assumed public morality and [[Safeguarding\|child protection]] standards.		__NOTOC__In the Western world, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''[[Wikipedia:Industry self-regulation\|self-regulate]]''', to stay in accordance with assumed public morality and [[Safeguarding\|child protection]] standards.

	The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from civil liberties groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to critique. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what governments see as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet.		The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from civil liberties groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to critique. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what governments see as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet.
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==Compulsory Blacklist==		==Compulsory Blacklist==

	These can be distinguished from ~~[[State blacklist\|~~state blacklists]] in that they are operated by officially independent bodies, but are still used to filter material from the services of ISPs who are members of the body. They often work alongside an [[Internet tipline]] type operation.		These can be distinguished from state blacklists in that they are operated by officially independent bodies, but are still used to filter material from the services of ISPs who are members of the body. They often work alongside an Internet tipline type operation.

	==See also==		==See also==

The Admins: could really do with more up to date takes - see body of research on self regulation

2023-08-28T10:39:38Z

could really do with more up to date takes - see body of research on self regulation

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:39, 28 August 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In the ~~western~~ world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with [[public morality]] and [[child protection]] standards. The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from [[civil liberties]] groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to ~~trace or prove~~. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what ~~the government sees~~ as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet. Censorship borne of self regulation efforts often consists of a mandatory legal compliance filter (usually billed as an "anti [[child pornography]] filter, such as that operated by the [[Internet Watch Foundation]]) and optional filters (i.e. [[censorware]]) aimed at parents for individually tailored "family" and "child" protection. ~~Whilst~~ the former system has historically tended to eliminate more legal material from the on-line experience, and the latter is very easy to circumvent, ISPs are given numerous opportunities to "convince" both the government and the public as to the benefits of self-regulation, as it is in the interests of both the state and the service providers themselves.		__NOTOC__In the Western world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''[[Wikipedia:Industry self-regulation\|self-regulate]]''', to stay in accordance with assumed public morality and [[Safeguarding\|child protection]] standards.

			The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from civil liberties groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to critique. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what governments see as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet.

			[[Censorship]] borne of self regulation efforts often consists of a mandatory legal compliance filter (usually billed as an "anti [[Child Pornography\|child pornography]] filter, such as that operated by the [[Internet Watch Foundation]]) and optional filters (i.e. censorware) aimed at parents for individually tailored "family" and "child" protection. While the former system has historically tended to eliminate more legal material from the on-line experience, and the latter is very easy to circumvent, ISPs are given numerous opportunities to "convince" both the government and the public as to the benefits of self-regulation, as it is in the interests of both the state and the service providers themselves.

	==Compulsory Blacklist==		==Compulsory Blacklist==

	These can be distinguished from [[State blacklist\|state blacklists]] in that they are operated by officially independent bodies, but are still used to filter material from the services of ISPs who are members of the body. They often work alongside an [[Internet tipline]] type operation.		These can be distinguished from [[State blacklist\|state blacklists]] in that they are operated by officially independent bodies, but are still used to filter material from the services of ISPs who are members of the body. They often work alongside an [[Internet tipline]] type operation.

	~~==Optional ISP filtering==~~

	~~Needs info.~~

	~~==Advantages and Disadvantages of self-regulation==~~

	==See also==		==See also==

	*[[INHOPE]]		*[[INHOPE]]
			*[[List of obfuscatory terms used by authorities]]
			*[[Special Article: Adverse effects of hysteria]]
			*[[Wikipedia:Industry self-regulation\|Wikipedia: Industry self-regulation]]

			[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:Censorship]][[Category:Child Pornography]][[Category:Terminology]][[Category:Terminology: Academic]][[Category:Terminology: Charity, NGO & "Professional"]][[Category:Law/Crime]][[Category:Law/Crime: International]][[Category:Terminology: Legal & Law Enforcement]]

The Admins at 18:13, 23 September 2009

2009-09-23T18:13:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:13, 23 September 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In the western world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with [[public morality]] and [[child protection]] standards. The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from [[civil liberties]] groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to trace or prove. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what the government sees as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet. Censorship borne of self regulation efforts often consists of a mandatory legal compliance filter (usually billed as an "anti [[child pornography]] filter, such as that operated by the [[Internet Watch Foundation]]) and optional filters (i.e. [[censorware]]) aimed at parents for individually tailored "family" and "child" protection. Whilst the former system has historically tended to eliminate more legal material from the on-line experience, and the latter is very easy to circumvent, ISPs are given numerous opportunities to "convince" both the government and the public as to the benefits of self regulation, as it is in the interests of both the state and the service providers themselves.		In the western world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with [[public morality]] and [[child protection]] standards. The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from [[civil liberties]] groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to trace or prove. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what the government sees as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet. Censorship borne of self regulation efforts often consists of a mandatory legal compliance filter (usually billed as an "anti [[child pornography]] filter, such as that operated by the [[Internet Watch Foundation]]) and optional filters (i.e. [[censorware]]) aimed at parents for individually tailored "family" and "child" protection. Whilst the former system has historically tended to eliminate more legal material from the on-line experience, and the latter is very easy to circumvent, ISPs are given numerous opportunities to "convince" both the government and the public as to the benefits of self-regulation, as it is in the interests of both the state and the service providers themselves.

	==Compulsory Blacklist==		==Compulsory Blacklist==
Line 6:		Line 6:

	==Optional ISP filtering==		==Optional ISP filtering==

			Needs info.

			==Advantages and Disadvantages of self-regulation==

	==See also==		==See also==

	*[[INHOPE]]		*[[INHOPE]]

The Admins: New page: In the western world, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with public morality and child protection st...

2009-09-23T18:09:44Z

New page: In the western world, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with public morality and child protection st...

New page

In the western world, [[Internet Service Providers]] (ISPs) are encouraged by governments to '''self-regulate''', to stay in accordance with [[public morality]] and [[child protection]] standards. The presumed benefits of this strategy to governments are reduced policing costs and less opposition from [[civil liberties]] groups, as the undoubted control exerted is subtler in nature and therefore harder to trace or prove. For ISPs, the self-regulation system provides a degree of autonomy in exchange for what the government sees as cheaper, less overt moderation of the internet. Censorship borne of self regulation efforts often consists of a mandatory legal compliance filter (usually billed as an "anti [[child pornography]] filter, such as that operated by the [[Internet Watch Foundation]]) and optional filters (i.e. [[censorware]]) aimed at parents for individually tailored "family" and "child" protection. Whilst the former system has historically tended to eliminate more legal material from the on-line experience, and the latter is very easy to circumvent, ISPs are given numerous opportunities to "convince" both the government and the public as to the benefits of self regulation, as it is in the interests of both the state and the service providers themselves.

==Compulsory Blacklist==

These can be distinguished from [[State blacklist|state blacklists]] in that they are operated by officially independent bodies, but are still used to filter material from the services of ISPs who are members of the body. They often work alongside an [[Internet tipline]] type operation.

==Optional ISP filtering==

==See also==

*[[INHOPE]]