Does the web need tougher controls?

2:19pm Tuesday 1st May 2007

Comments (8)   Have your say »

Footage of violent attacks taking place in Brighton have been posted on video sharing websites such as YouTube. The assaults are part of an increasingly disturbing trend among certain groups of teenagers to glorify violence.

Here, David Lepper, MP for Brighton Pavilion, argues that those who allow the videos to be posted on the internet - as well as the thugs they feature - should face court action.

Following a story in The Argus about disturbing images celebrating gang violence in Churchill Square and other parts of the city appearing on the internet, I am asking both the Home Office and the communications regulator Ofcom to look at whether we need to do more to control what appears on websites like YouTube.

There is no doubt the internet is a huge force for good in the world.

Through it we can communicate across geographical, national and political boundaries.

We can keep in daily contact with family and friends on the other side of the world.

We have access to information, ideas and entertainment of all kinds.

We can share the experiences of people whose lives are very different from our own.

And when governments try to censor the political content of websites there is, quite rightly, an outcry.

But the internet can be used for more sinister purposes as well. For instance, there is general international agreement about clamping down on internet child pornography and the Internet Watch organisation has played a leading role in that.

Every so often, some event makes many ask what we can do to minimise the internet's potential for harm.

The violent death of Brighton teacher Jane Longhurst was one.

It raised concerns about access to and the effects on behaviour of violent internet pornography.

I congratulate The Argus on the vital role it played in backing the campaign by Jane's mother Liz to get Government action to curb this extreme pornography.

The campaign was later backed by Amnesty International and has led to legislation soon to come before Parliament about possession of such images.

As one of the MPs with Mrs Longhurst at many of her meetings with ministers and civil servants, I discovered just how difficult it is to control what is on the internet, especially when - unlike with the issue of child pornography - there is no international consensus about what is or is not acceptable. It can be difficult, if not impossible, to track down where material originates.

It is a different kind of violence - highlighted last month by The Argus - which has once again raised this issue. In this case there is no real doubt about the origin.

The pictures, apparently taken from CCTV cameras and from mobile phones, glorified real-life violence.

They showed a gang fight and violent attack in Brighton's Churchill Square, harassment and violence at Moulsecoomb railway station and an incident on a bus.

The images had been edited with a music track and posted on YouTube.

Everyone who has seen this footage and the stills from it has been shocked, not only by the mindless and inexcusable thuggery but that it has been made publicly available in a way which seems to celebrate extreme aggression.

There is no doubt the intention of those who did this was to boast about their involvement and Sussex Police are investigating how the CCTV footage got on to the internet.

Of course, the very great virtue of YouTube is that it provides a space where anyone can post their films and thoughts and ideas.

But YouTube has a code of practice which should exclude material like the Brighton pictures. The fact it did not exclude them until a fuss was made raises questions about how the code of practice is monitored.

That is why I am asking the Home Office and the communications watchdog Ofcom to consider whether stricter regulation is needed, not just for YouTube but also for other sites like it.

I don't know the answers to those questions. It could be that selfregulation by the industry is enough and that YouTube was just sloppy in letting these images through.

I welcome the fact that the courts have dealt with at least some of those involved in the violent incidents.

The question I believe we now need to consider is if the courts also need the power - if they don't already have it - to deal with those who posted or sanctioned the posting of the material on YouTube.

If they don't have that power already, then maybe the law needs changing.

• Do you think websites like YouTube should be prosecuted for hosting these violent videos? Have your say below.