Happy Mutant Profile
Mikey
British Airways blocks Boing Boing
September 30, 2007 1:41pm
British Airways blocks Boing Boing
September 29, 2007 3:57pm
You guys are just trolling or getting too granular. Anyone can tell the difference between hardcore porn and simply a nude person. Just as Michelangelo's David is perfectly appropriate for my girls to see and (Insert Porn Site Here) is not.
I am not saying BB should be blocked. I am saying I understand BA making this decision.
British Airways blocks Boing Boing
September 28, 2007 3:24pm
Some of you really go off the deep end. I am simply making a point I do not let my children surf unsupervised or irresponsibly depend on others to protect me. I don't run with scissors nor do I poke a sharp stick in my eye.
However, I also recognize there are other people in the world and this place, called "Earth" is not just about "ME" and my freedom. I have net freedom in that I can see the web uncensored and I choose the content I view (including jerking-off mini mammals). But that is in my home at my desk.
BA could give everyone a straight feed to the Internet and I certain nothing would go wrong. It would be just grand and as you walked through the terminal, every 13 year old with a sense of humor would put up a Goatse image or some other crass shot to offend "Mum and Dad."
How do I protect them now? Do I need to put a sack on their heads. I am not a prude and I am not so high strung to worry about the kiddies catching a boob or butt. I wish I could make decisions about everything they are exposed to but that is simply unrealistic.
Hell, I live in France (where the naked ladies dance) and nudity is everywhere. A visit to the beach is an education. My kids have been to Amsterdam and I had to explain what the coffee house sells and why Daddy doesn't drink that kind of coffee. I do my job as a parent and don't expect anyone to it for me.
For me, this is like putting the adult magazines on the top shelf or putting cardboard up so the harsher covers are blocked. I don't see that as censorship. I see that as responsible.
British Airways blocks Boing Boing
September 28, 2007 4:35am
OK..I am completely against censorship and am a proponent of a free and open Internet. However, I think to blame BA for being cautious is absurd. I also think this stance is counterproductive to helping keep the Internet open and censorship free.
People have children. Some subscribe to strict moral or religious beliefs. Those in these and other groups simply need to be provided a simple and effective tool to guard against questionable material.
The BAs of the world don't need websites showing a a cartoon squirrel jerking off in their lounges and having the press announce, they deliver porn catering to children. It is simply prudent
The real issue of censorship is not at the corporate level but in government and that is where the fight needs to be fought. Arguing with BA and threatening not to fly with them because they cover their ass seems ridiculous.
Personally, I feel it would be better if BA provided free software in their lounge that would allow people to use the net guarded OR provide a method to turn off the blocking. However, we are talking about Airline Attendants managing this. They don't have the time to mess around with personal Internet Access.
Did you fly first class? Maybe the nicer cabins have unrestricted access...hehe...the rich rule the world.
Boing Boing is an adult site with adult content. That is not to say that it is porn. It is simply cool information that is relevant to intelligent adults. I don't believe blocking it from public access is necessarily wrong as there is often edgy and sexually oriented content. But that's why I read it.
Mikey
BTW - I think it is worth noting that on today's page of Boing Boing is a cartoon picture of an ejaculating squirrel. I can tell you as a Dad, I would be quite upset if my 9 and 11 year old girls simply happened upon it in an Airport.
No friends yet.


the latest
latest episodes
They may be both or neither. IMHO, they obviously have an IT department who made an arbitrary decision or they just use a boilerplate install of the filter. Either way, they are not an Internet provider.
They are an airline and I still believe it is absurd to call what they did with blocking BB as censorship. It is simply an ass covering because they don't want to risk the liability of a law suit.
On a side note, I think it also seems crazy to change airlines because of a casual web site. However, that's just my thought.