"Computer Shopper" demonstrates the HO's level of understanding of the IWF...

[David Biggins]

Home Office clueless over its own anti-child porn measures
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20

The Home Office has admitted that it has been trying to force ISPs to
subscribe to the Internet Watch Foundation's (IWF) blacklist, even
though it doesn't know what the organisation does.=20

Speaking exclusively to Computer Shopper, a Home Office spokesman
thought the IWF deletes illegal websites and doesn't look at the content
they rate.=20

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/news/249655/home-office-clueless-over-its
-own-antichild-porn-measures.html=20


Home Office clueless: The transcript
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

CS: Is the IWF allowed to view illegal content in its office, given that
it is not a government body? If so, why? Is there a special licence that
is required, and how many other organisations have this permission?

HO: The IWF doesn't perform that role itself. What it does is provide a
list of websites containing illegal images to industry members, and then
they themselves block access to those websites.=20

CS: Doesn't the IWF have to visit illegal websites and download child
pornography in order to compile that list?

HO: They have a list of websites with illegal images. It's something
that we don't physically do ourselves, as it were.

http://blog.computershopper.co.uk/2009/03/home-office-interview-transcri
pt.html=20


Hmmmmmm.



Dave.