Round Table: Should India block Internet porn by default?

The strongest point in favour of the Internet is the open-ended nature that it boasts. The flip side to that open nature, though, may be the lack of filters to the kind of content you can access. Pornographic content is easily available for anyone from all age groups in India. While both the Indian Penal Code and the recent IT Act prohibit the production and transmission of “obscene material”, there is no real law against watching pornography.

The Supreme Court recently heard a lawsuit that sought a ban on Internet pornography and also sought to make watching such content a non-bailable offense. The petition revolves around sensitive topics like child pornography, as well as the violent nature of the kind of content that can be found. In response to the hearing, the government has said that it is difficult to block the international pornographic websites in the country. But is outright banning such content really a viable option? 

More from News & Analysis

What is the US HIRE Bill and why is India’s $250-billion IT sector worried? Is the internet dead? What's this theory that OpenAI's Sam Altman says might be true?

The British government has recently taken steps to address this issue by asking all UK Internet Service Providers to automatically block access to pornographic content unless customers specifically ask for the same. While the UK Prime Minister David Cameron is now saying that there “may be problems down the line”, the proposal seems promising. The question that arises now is: Should India make the local ISPs put the same system in place?

Should India also ban Internet porn by default ? (Image credit: Tweaktown)

Anujeet Majumdar
In my opinion, this kind of law will be beneficial. It is not really about banning sites with pornographic content. That is not really the solution. If users desire such content, they will be able to get their hands on it eventually. The point is to remember that some content has a time and place for its consumption. An 11-year-old should not be able to easily access such kind of content. Another pertinent point that arises here is content that relates to child pornography and violent content. There needs to be some filters in place against them. By asking Internet Service Providers to block Internet porn by default, it may ensure that the younger populace will not be able to access content that is not meant for them.

The Supreme Court recently heard a lawsuit that insinuated that pornography was the leading cause behind violent acts against women. While this seems a bit far-fetched, it stands to reason that such violent content should not be made available to the younger audience. As adults, banning or watching pornographic content an offense makes no sense. Users who wish to watch porn should be able to ask their ISPs to allow them access. While there may be perceived stigma associated with making such a request, it should be understood that the move is not really about censorship or targeting users. It is about safeguarding the younger generation while giving adults the freedom to access the content that they want.

Mithun Kidambi
Any call for curbing, monitoring, or logging anything on the web will draw howls of protest from almost all quarters. You may be led to believe that the Internet is the last bastion of free speech and other universally recognised freedoms of expression. The latest bee in the bonnet has been David Cameron’s, now retracted, assertion that all ISPs in UK must filter out porn sites by default and show them only when a user opts in. He also went out to say that only porn that can be legally sold in DVD and other formats, in UK would be legal online. Should India work on a similar provision, is the question?

This time around, the Indian government, surprisingly, has proven to be far less prone to bluster than the British PM. In a submission to the court, earlier in July, the government admitted that banning or filtering online pornography faces a number of issues, ranging from the technical to the legal. On the question of whether such a move is necessary, the answer is a simple no. What the authorities should instead focus on is on how to stop the production of any “illegal” pornography, and by that I mean any exploitative porn such as “rape porn”, “kiddie porn” and other such forms of pornographic content. Moreover, asking the ISPs to implement any filtering mechanism will drive up the cost of Internet access which will effectively mean that everyone would be paying a tax just to keep the porn away. There are better places where that money and human effort can be employed.

Nishtha Kanal
It would be pretty hilarious to see the results if the Indian government did try to implement such a programme. For one, this would require heavy amounts of funds, and a developing country like India can do with using this money on better infrastructure and standard of living rather than on frivolous activities like automatically blocking pornographic content.

This is not to say that India has not attempted this on a smaller scale before. The Department of Telecom has, in the past, asked ISPs to block access to websites that allow sharing of pornographic content and even the Honourable Supreme Court has asked the government to work with various departments to try and block porn in India.

What’s most surprising is that this judgement stems from PILs that insinuate that pornography is the reason behind atrocities committed on women while there is no real study to back this claim up. Porn already is opt-in. You can choose not to watch pornographic content and be careful that you do not wander off to the darker parts of the Internet. The idea seems a very weak one and it wouldn’t be too long before the authorities themselves abandon the programme mid-way due to lack of funds or public outrage if it’s started in India.

India has a strong stance on making porn. But what about watching it ? (Image credit: generationnext)

Shunal Doke
Pornographic content is more often than not a touchy subject for most of the people in the government. I believe that UK’s move is pretty bad, and hopefully, our country won’t consider the idea, despite its hatred for anything deemed “sacrilege” and “profane”.

The UK’s idea to ban pornographic content is not only violating freedom, but it also opens up a whole new can of worms of what is regarded as pornographic. What if there exists a science website that shows the cross-section of human reproductive system? Would that be deemed pornographic? What about the Wikipedia article for porn?

Sure, some might say “you can just ask your ISP to give you access,” but that brings new problems, namely, red tape. In most parts of India, something as simple as changing your Internet plan is a considerable undertaking. Not only does it require the filling out of a gazillion forms, but you also have to nag them to death. Now, think about what would happen when you ask them to un-block porn for you. First: they judge you. After that, they’ll ask you, why. Assuming you jump through all of these annoying hoops, they say that they’ll do it, but it takes you days, perhaps even weeks, to realise that they haven’t even gotten around to it.

And that’s assuming that our government has the decency to let us opt in to look for porn. Our government’s stance against pornography is well documented. This is even ignoring the idea that someone will probably end up protesting the ability to opt in because it somehow managed to offend their sensibilities, since porn is supposedly “wrong”.

Ramkumar Iyer

The possibility of our childish wise leaders banning anything deemed “pornographic” irks me mostly because of how dictionaries define the word. Take for instance the Merriam-Webster dictionary, which defines the word as “1. the depiction of erotic behaviour (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement”, “2. material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behaviour and is intended to cause sexual excitement” and “3. the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction”. Going by how our country works, pornography could hence be interpreted as ANYTHING on the Internet that makes you very angry, sad, happy or, well, excited.

If this happens, I’m pretty sure our government can call the law to ban anyone who questions them because it incited rage/disapproval/sadness because it’s “pornographic” and the dictionary defines it so. You might argue that I’m going into semantics here, but you’re all set to be disappointed if you think our government won’t do the same to slap the cuffs on harmless Internet bloggers stating their opinions.

You could call me paranoid for saying this, but hell, if this comes to pass, even a news website could be taken down for “arousing a quick intense emotional reaction”. And when that starts happening (not that it isn’t happening now), you can be pretty sure I’ll be packing my bags for a more liberal country in Africa. Why Africa? Because they have bigger problems than pornography. As a third world country, we have most of those problems too, but, hey! Porn’s corrupting our children when they’re not too busy looking for food, right?

Have your say in the comments section below: