How many who pushed for it now oppose it?
.XXX Domain on Hold
The Internet’s key oversight agency [ICANN] agreed Tuesday to a one-month delay in approving a new “.xxx” domain name after the U.S. government cited “unprecedented” opposition to a virtual red-light district.
The [Commerce] department received nearly 6,000 letters and e-mails expressing concerns about the impact of pornography on families and children and objecting to setting aside a domain suffix for it, he said.
Who gives a rip one way or the other? But what bugs me about this story is that the same people who would scream that we need a “xxx” domain in order to help separate “adult” sites from “mainstream” ones will be the same people who will now oppose it as “legitimizing” pornographers now that it reaches the final stages.
The good news is that it doesn’t make any difference one way or the other. The truth is that we need a few bogus issues such as this one to keep the busybodies occupied with something that will give them the illusion of being engaged while harming no one in the process.
Good point John. Give them a pulpit on family values and maybe they’ll leave the things they don’t understand alone, which is a considerable list. Even the democrats are running to the right with these issues. Have you ever wondered who checks the pollsters?
While the XXX domain sounds like a great idea, there are three problems: First, what is porn? Second, who gets to decide what’s porn? Third, who gets to enforce it?
Bogus issue yes, as you say, but not to keep *them* entertained – to keep *US* entertained while they go ahead and keep harming people without the rest of *us* noticing. An old practice here in Europe.
I’d have to agree — it’s pretty ironic that this was originally intended to filter out adult from the rest — making it easier, so to speak, to block access with parental controls.
It’s not at all a surprise that the very ones who promote this technology are the ones running away from it so fast. These are the same people who run on platforms of family values, only to be caught with prostitutes in back alleys of Hollywood. Triple X sites don’t promote sexual thought, do I even need to explain what does…
Let ’em shoot themselves in the foot, it’ll come full circle again in a few years.
I think the first time I heard about the possibility of a .xxx domain name was from your column John years ago. I think you were making the case that the .xxx domain name would eliminate the need for complicated filtering software. I thought it was a great idea then and I still do.
Would there be some arguments over what is porn? Perhaps in 1% of the sites, but those aren’t the problems. The real problem is the incredible amount of no-doubt-about it explict sexual content.
Requiring all pay-for-sex sites to move to that domain would be a great step since it would be so easy to block those sites. If the big ISP’s would block all adult content that doesn’t come from the .xxx domain it force the porn peddlers to switch over. (I suppose it would be fine if a subscriber could opt-out of the filtering).
One wonders if part of the opposition is that creating the filtering tools has become a big business for some. Part of the appeal for some about such software is that they can block so many things (like any talk of birth control, sexual orientation, or divergent religous beliefs). While certainly parents have such a right that is hardly the mainstream concern about inappropriate sites.
A simple, mandatory .xxx domain for the worst material on the net would be a great step.
Todd, so it’s YOU who gets to decide what’s porn?! Are you going to enforce it too?
Fish,
There is no “problem” inasmuch as it is an opt-in proposal (i.e., a pornographic site would be allowed to have either/both a .xxx and .com address, or even a .org, etc.) That’s why the whole “debate” is, in my opinion, manufactured.
The morality critics are flip-flopping: If you make the .xxx addresses optional, they scream that the companies are not required to move their addresses where they can be filtered; but if you make the .xxx address mandatory, they will complain that you are giving the businesses “legitimacy” by giving them their own extension. 🙂
The issue, of course, is about control.
As near as I can tell, there is no reason from a “morality” standpoint to favor or disfavor the proposal. Some reputable adult sites might wish for the proposal to go through, just so they can say, “OK, dammit, I’ve done as you asked, now leave me alone!” But probably the one right reason for approving the proposal is also the simplest: because domain name buyers wish to buy domain names with the .xxx extension.
“Two in five Internet users visited an adult site in April, according to tracking by comScore Media Metrix. The company said 4 percent of all Web traffic and 2 percent of all surfing time involved an adult site.”
2 in 5 users sounds about right, but I would have guessed higher than 4% of traffic.
“Conservative groups such as the Family Research Council also expressed worries that creating a “.xxx” suffix would also legitimize pornographers.”
They are already legitimate (established businesses, making money). The “Virtual” Red Light Districts already exist, they are on the “.com” and “.net” domains.
Is the FRC against it just because some in the porn industry are for it? 🙁
Does this site qualify??
Surely it is possible to have a “common ground” defintion that would cover most of the worst stuff. Those with artistic merit wouldn’t have to fall into the .xxx domain. I doubt there is any of Robert Mapplethorpe’s art books to be found at any adult bookstore. I also don’t think you can find any hardcore porn at your local Barnes and Nobel. It seems most people have a pretty good idea of what hard core porn is/isn’t.
So Fish, do I want the job as the net’s porn censor? Hardly. Isn’t there some common sense ways to determine what sites should be placed in the .xxx domain that would satisfy 95% of all net users.
I’m 36 years old. Growing up a Midwestern town of 2000 people, it was difficult for teenage boys to find copies of playboy magazines. Hardcore porn even more so. Obviously it existed. But the fact that every home with a computer didn’t have ready access to all sorts of porn was a good thing. I think young people should be sheltered from that as long as they can. (I also think many adults would prefer not to have it so accessible).
The anti-porn crusaders don’t do the cause any favors with their judmental attitudes and their inability to speak to audiences outside of their narrow religous framework.
The Internet is a strange mix. It feels like private medium with content directed just for us and most of us resent the idea that someone would censor “our’ conent. It also is a vast, almost “exhausive” medium touching on almost every subject. Yet it is public space and to at least segment some content to at least attempt to respect basic community standards is a worthwile goal.
Can we then force all religious sites to (.god) as I want to easily filter out any accidental possibility that I might accidently come across some disturbed nutcases purportingly preaching that they have all the answers and potentially turning me into some desperate victim of my own human weaknesses?
Does this site qualify??
Is it trying too??
Teyecoon,
If you are a consenting adult you are free to do as you please. A slogan for the internet should be posted as “browser beware”.
But what about children who use the internet? Do they not have the right to surf without being confronted with xxx porn? There are too many examples of innocent sounding links that are disguised as xxx porn.
Teyecoon, the .god domain is not a bad idea. However, it needs to be modified based on a group’s theological perspective.
Most Christians would need to use the domain .God (with a capital G).
Hindus could use the .god (with a lower case g) since they believe in multiple gods.
Jewish groups that prohibit using God’s name in vain would need to use the domain .g*d.
I’m sure there are other varations that would need to be developed too!
It’s so funny that you’re suggesting using “common sense” to judge what porn is when this whole debate derives from the fact that people don’t have common sense! (If they did, there would be no debate.)
The answer is in the question my friend.
Tom,
No, I don’t think anyone has some special right to be shielded from reality but they do have a right to voluntarily (opt-out) shielding themselves from exposure to it. In fact, I had to turn off my OTA TV to escape the monotonous and pompous funeral coverage of the Pope. Furthermore, I think children have much more resilient minds then people give them credit for and are able to handle life’s “truths” much more readily and easily than adult individuals who were sheltered. The fact is that nature rewards the young who learn about and become aware of their environment. It’s what being a child is all about but unfortunately there are too many parents who can’t/won’t educate their children about life’s uncomfortable aspects. IMO, if a child is old enough to use the Internet by themselves then they are more than likely capable of handling brief exposure to some X-rated pictures although in a perfect world they would feel comfortable enough to share and discuss the issue with their parents and be provided some objective understanding and guidance about it.
This is an old arguement, beaten to death, and the original question that was stated above is the same ‘What is porn, and who gets to decide it?’ Coming from the Midwest, and living in San Francisco, I’m sure there are people out here that differ in that opinion compared to my friends back home. The question changes from person to person, and it cannot be fully regulated… and we’ve tried.
Remember when Guilliani tried to put together a commission to censor what is art and what is porn in New York? That came from the contreversy of ‘Piss Christ’ and the Virgin Mary creation? All white males over 40, that one died fast. To me, that painting is art and a statement, to others it was obscene and touted as pornography in a similar fashion.
Then there’s George Bush Snr., who’s administration tackled this one aggressively, going so far as to ‘censor’ movie titles by putting pressure on these movie companies. Since the task of watching videos to determine their adult nature is almost impossible a task, they started going by title… which led to Georgie writing a letter about the obscenities in the move, I believe the title was ‘Doing it Debbie’s Way’, a Debbie Gibson workout video?
I’ve used that example before, but it goes to show, you can’t censor it, it’s too broad an opinion — those value sets are up to you and your family, and that’s life.
And, I’ve seen Mapplethorpe considered porn by others.
Howdy would you mind letting me know which hosting company you’re utilizing? I’ve loaded your blog in 3
completely different web browsers and I must say this blog
loads a lot quicker then most. Can you suggest a good internet hosting provider at a reasonable price?
Thanks a lot, I appreciate it!