Looks like the .xxx TLD (top level domain), which had been proposed for porn sites, will not happen. I remember when this idea was first proposed, and I was actually surprised to learn that it hadn't gone away, but it seems that the decision is now final. This makes me mildly irritated.
The NYT story doesn't report the case against it completely, although the obvious hand-waving explanations are presented: some think it would serve as a magnet for kids, others think it would mean ICANN would be expanding into the regulation/censorship business, rather than just assigning domain names, and like that. Other stories don't seem to add much, although one of them suggests an additional argument against: that many porn-site operators themselves were against it, fearing being "ghettoized." (I have also heard, although didn't see mentioned today, that many established porn sites have recently turned against the idea, claiming they had invested too much time and money and building a "brand identity." Think WhiteHouse.com, I guess.)
When I first heard about this idea, it seemed less complicated. Many site operators were quoted as being in favor of the idea, especially on a voluntary basis, indicating that they were trying to be responsible about regulating site traffic. It would be brain-dead easy to configure a computer and/or browser to refuse to open any pages on a .xxx site, which would cut down on their problems with screening underage visitors. This story gives credence to this thinking; according to the group lobbying for the .xxx TLD: "ICM cited preregistrations of more than 76,000 names as evidence of support."
I have to say that I don't really have a problem with people looking at pictures of whatever gets their freak on, provided the models are willing adults. It's not for me, or anyone else, to decide for others what is "worthwhile" or "appropriate." To go a little hyperbolic, recall that we used to have an Attorney General who once spent $8000 to drape a statue, fearing his erection a bare marble breast would mess up his photo ops.
I also don't really have a problem with porn sites being lumped into a category that makes it easy to block them en masse. We seem to tolerate zoning laws that prevent brick and mortar porn outlets from opening next to elementary schools, for example.
Sure, a .xxx TLD wouldn't solve all problems. I think making it mandatory would be impossible, and would be fraught with real censorship issues. And if implemented as voluntary, the obvious next step is to wonder what would be done about all of the sites that didn't make the switch.
Too many people seem bent on requiring The Law to protect The Children these days, and are too lazy to take personal responsibility. Too many others have appointed themselves gatekeepers of taste. But my real problem with the anti-.xxx decision is that I think we're in an age where no one is interested in partial solutions. If something is not a magic bullet, it's too easy to dismiss it out of hand. Would creating a .xxx TLD have evermore prevented children from looking at bare naked bodies? Obviously not. But I thought setting up a voluntary .xxx TLD would have been a step in a good direction, and it's hard to see how it would have hurt.
WebProNews has a story that describes in more detail the arguments offered by the ICANN board members dissenting from the majority decision.
BBS News, which bills itself as "Your true conservative news source," has a pretty good commentary on the matter, and I don't just say that because they agree with me on this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment