Movies have them, even TV programs have them these days, but I think that the Government is pushing things with their ambitious plans to rate websites. Considering the -billions- of websites out there, it does seem a little silly to rate them all:
Internet websites could be given cinema-style age-ratings under plans by the Government to limit access to “unacceptable” material, Culture Secretary Andy Burnham has warned.
Would would rate these sites? Imagine the amount of work required. Who would verify the rating? Also once given, what would stop any website developer from changing the content?
I completely agree with what he wants to achieve, to prevent children from viewing questionable material, or from stopping violent content such as Islam terrorist beheadings, and so on.
Since he wants to focus on what children see, surely better supervision by parents would seem to be the better solution, as he himself boasts of:
Mr Burnham says that his own children are closely supervised when they use the computer. No impractical rating system is necessary in his household. It is as a parent, therefore, rather than as a politician that he is pointing the way forward.
Clearly then, he is speaking out and pushing a plan for Labour but personally uses supervision. Not just impractical – he seems to think that close supervision of his children would not work with other families, but has made no effort to market that as a plan.
If you set up accounts on computers properly you can tightly control what your children see and do online. Perhaps that is a more practical method rather than a totally unenforceable ratings scheme?
So what do you think – would a ratings scheme help? – would it be completely unenforceable? – would it be easy to cheat such a system?
Tags: new labour, ratings, website rating
Happy New Year to you too Corey! Hope yours is prosperous and happy :)
Here, in AST, I post this in 2008, but I believe that you're destined to read it in 2009, since ...