http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/22/david-cameron-page-3
Quotes highlighted in blue.
Important information highlighted in purple.
This article focuses on David Cameron disagreeing with the issue on banning Page3 despite that effort to tackle online pornography. He argued that there is a difference between newspapers which parents can keep away from their children, and the children teenagers can watch legal pornography whenever they want. Similarly, in a BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour he argued that there is a difference between images online and the images show in newspaper.
Cameron revealed, "I've said what I've said about Page 3 and the Sun and I haven't changed my views. But should we do more to try and help parents to protect their children from legal pornography on the internet? Yes I think we should, and again last week we made some big progress on that". This is followed by, "You can control your children's access to newspapers and books and magazines. The problem with the internet is that our children are all online and they're using YouTube and they're searching for videos and the rest of it and there's a danger that they can stumble across really quite, sometimes hardcore legal pornography."
Furthermore, he stated that the plan is for BT, Virgin, Sky and Talk Talk to make sure that every household offered a default-on filter to stop those images coming through. This would be useful as parents would have the control on stopping their children to seeing harmful images.
Personally, I disagree with David Cameron's view that newspaper images and online images. This is because, both newspaper and online pornography objectifies women which is unacceptable, especially for young females. Thus, newspapers should be equally banned as they portray sexualised images of women which is soft porn and harmful for teenagers as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment