Latest news with #LadyBertin
The Guardian
03-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Porn isn't just a reflection of our desires – it shapes them, putting women and girls at risk
If you've seen porn in recent years, you'll know it's grim out there these days. Incest and strangulation are rife, as is coercion, racism, and also sexual violence. It's front and centre on mainstream porn sites and many social media platforms, pushed by recommendation algorithms on a drive to maximise engagement and profit. It's a world away from the days when 'hardcore' porn meant an erect penis. But we might be on the brink of change. Last week the long-awaited independent porn review led by the Conservative peer Gabby Bertin was published, marking the biggest review of pornography regulation in more than 40 years. Its findings amount to a clear indictment of what counts as porn today and the inaction of successive governments to do anything to fix it. It was a Labour government which first brought in the extreme porn law in 2009, recognising the need for a step-change in how we regulate pornography. It's now time for the next great step forward, and it's one that will be integral to the success of the government's mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. The public appetite for regulation has shifted. For a while, many believed that a hands-off approach to regulation would strengthen our sexual freedoms and protect our right to privacy. In reality, it's done the opposite. Most pornography today suppresses our sexual freedom. What we watch is driven largely not by user choice and preference but profit-driven AI recommendation algorithms that have learned we are drawn to material that invokes disgust, shock and rage. Our privacy rights have been trampled by multinational porn conglomerates who have had free range to mine some of our most intimate data to feed these algorithms. One study of over 22,000 porn sites found that 93% of them were sending user data to at least one third party, often without users knowing. We have started to recognise the impact of this across much of our other online activity. In 2020, a review into bias in algorithmic decision-making commissioned by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, found that racist and sexist attitudes are not just reproduced but produced by recommendation algorithms. And the information commissioner has now launched an investigation into how social media platforms are using data generated by children's online activity to serve them content. This is partly how we've got to a place where so much online porn promotes and perpetuates harmful, violent, misogynistic and racist tropes. The porn platforms themselves are implicated in producing these preferences, pushing men and increasingly women further than we would otherwise go. While Lady Bertin's report doesn't delve deep enough into algorithmic decision-making on porn sites and its impact on our freedom and privacy, it does provide a blueprint for what needs to change. Its most important recommendation is the establishment of parity between what is regulated offline and what is regulated online. It also suggests that platforms are mandated to adopt specific safety-by-design measures, via the development of a safe pornography code in the Online Safety Act, or a new publications offence. Alongside this, it recommends that pornography depicting incest or strangulation should be made illegal under the extreme pornography act, and that the Home Office is the natural home for pornography policy, creating a clear route for oversight and accountability and ending the 'pass the buck' approach to regulation that has dominated debate so far. The report also contains a passing mention of support for device-level age verification, if the measures to restrict children's access to porn sites in the Online Safety Act prove ineffective. Far from a simple difference, this shift significantly alters who is responsible for keeping kids safe; from the platforms that profit from their access, on to parents and carers who would have to keep them away from any verified devices. It isn't a better option, and it definitely isn't a safer system; unsurprisingly, the porn platforms prefer it, because it would do less harm to their traffic. On publication of the report, the government announced they will respond to each recommendation in due course. The review marks the kind of opportunity we would say comes once in a lifetime. Except it has come before. As prime minister in 2013, David Cameron announced that, when it comes to porn, 'what you can't get in a shop, you shouldn't be able to get online'. Twelve years later, Lady Bertin's first recommendation is the same: that pornographic content that is illegal to distribute in physical formats should also be treated as illegal content on online platforms. It's taken us over a decade to end up in the same place. It's not that we don't know what needs to be done. We just need this government to finally step up and actually do it. Clare McGlynn also contributed to this article Fiona Vera-Gray is a professor of sexual violence at London Metropolitan University and co-director of the Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit Clare McGlynn is a professor of law at Durham University and expert on the legal regulation of pornography
Telegraph
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Ban online porn that would be illegal on high street, urges Tory peer
Harmful online porn that would be illegal on the high street should be banned, a government review of the industry has said. The review, commissioned by Rishi Sunak and published on Thursday, found that violent, harmful and misogynistic porn was common on mainstream platforms. However, the material would be judged as illegal and refused classification by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) if it was sold in shops on the high street, according to the review by Baroness Bertin, a Tory peer. She said: 'This means that if this content was distributed in physical form (for example, in DVDs), the person supplying the material would face criminal charges, including a prison sentence of up to two years under the Video Recordings Act 1984. 'This disparity between the online and 'offline' world cannot continue. Pornographic content that would be refused classification in the 'offline' world should not be available to view online.' She suggested that such a ban could be introduced through a safe porn code in the Online Safety Act or by creating a new publication offence. Her report said: 'The aim of this would be to prohibit certain pornographic content online – including degrading, violent and misogynistic content, as well as that which could encourage an interest in child sex abuse – just as it is prohibited in the 'offline' world.' Making it illegal would also mean mainstream online platforms – the worst of which for porn is Elon Musk's X – would be required by law to remove it and prevent it appearing online. If they persistently failed to take it down, Ofcom, the online regulator, would have powers to impose fines of up to 10 per cent of their global turnover – and to jail executives for up to two years if they failed to abide by the watchdog's demands. 'Choking' porn changing real-world behaviour Lady Bertin also recommended that non-fatal strangulation pornography – commonly known as 'choking' – should be illegal to possess, distribute and publish. She said it was the starkest example of where online violent pornography had changed 'offline' behaviour. ''Choking' sex is now being normalised, with a survey showing 38 per cent of women aged 18-39 have been choked during sex,' she added. She noted that the Domestic Abuse Act of 2021 had made non-fatal strangulation a crime in itself, so that the definition of extreme illegal pornography needed to clearly state that it fell within its scope. Lady Bertin also recommended that incest pornography should be made illegal and that content that might encourage an interest in child sex abuse should be prohibited. 'Some online pornographic content depicts disturbing 'role-play' including incest and adults role playing as children – evidence shows that this type of pornography is used by perpetrators to permit child sex abuse. This is totally unacceptable,' she said. Writing for The Telegraph, Natasha Kaplinsky, the president of the BBFC, said: 'This is not about restricting adults' access to legal content: where pornographic content is neither illegal nor harmful, adults have a right to choose what to watch. 'This is about content that eroticises rape and the violent abuse of women or which promotes a sexual interest in children. 'Parity between how pornographic content is regulated online and offline is vitally important. If society is serious about addressing the fundamental challenge of harmful content, we must ensure that what is unacceptable offline is also unacceptable online.' The Department for Science Innovation and Technology has said it will respond to the recommendations once they have been laid before Parliament. Measures to increase regulation of pornography, including to prevent access by children, are already part of the Online Safety Act, which became law in October 2023. Services that publish their own pornographic content – including with generative artificial intelligence tools – are already required to have age checks. From July, all websites on which pornographic material can be found must also introduce 'robust' age-checking techniques such as demanding photo ID or running credit card checks for UK users. Ofcom estimates that approximately a third of adult internet users in the UK – 14 million people – watch online pornography, of which about three-quarters are men. The law has not kept pace with pornography's evolution – we must ensure parity on and offline By Natasha Kaplinsky Choking. Incest. Violent abuse. This is just some of the harmful pornographic content that is freely available online. Such material would never be approved for distribution on physical media formats like DVD and Blu-ray – what we call 'offline'. The BBFC has been classifying offline pornographic content for 40 years and our position has always been the same: pornography is for adults only. And, we are legally required to refuse classification of any content which is illegal or potentially harmful. Adult content we consider harmful includes any pornography which depicts non-consensual or sexually abusive activity or which encourages an interest in abusive relationships – such as incestuous or underage relationships. We also refuse to classify the depiction of any acts likely to cause serious physical harm, such as 'choking'. Unclassified pornography is illegal to distribute offline and a retailer convicted of selling such content could face a prison sentence under the Video Recordings Act 1984. However, legislation has not kept pace with how pornography is primarily consumed today. The BBFC's statutory remit covers content published offline but there are no equivalent protections online, where this appalling content remains freely available. Whenever I have a conversation with a fellow parent, we invariably share our fears about our children growing up in a society where unfettered access to violent pornography has become normalised. Today there is reason for hope. The Government has published the findings of an independent pornography review, led over the past year by Baroness Bertin. The review has found this content, and its influence, to be deep-rooted in society; its harm potential, abundant. Lady Bertin recommends that violent and abusive pornography online should be treated as illegal content. It also calls for a body such as the BBFC to take on an auditing role to ensure that online platforms do not carry any such material. I welcome Lady Bertin's report and the BBFC will work with the Government on the recommendations in any way we can, including by taking on a formal auditing role to better protect audiences online. This would be a natural extension of the offline role we have fulfilled for decades. This is not about restricting adults' access to legal content: where pornographic content is neither illegal nor harmful, adults have a right to choose what to watch. This is about content that eroticises rape and the violent abuse of women or which promotes a sexual interest in children. Parity between how pornographic content is regulated online and offline is vitally important. If society is serious about addressing the fundamental challenge of harmful content, we must ensure that what is unacceptable offline is also unacceptable online.
