February 14, 2003

"How Appealing" is Pornography

There's times when I wish censorware investigation could be my job. I've been busy all day job-hunting, so I haven't yet had a chance to investigate the blacklisting as pornography of the How Appealing blog by the NetSpective censorware.

This along with

... other sites which are blocked, including Arts & Letters Daily (http://www.aldaily.com), Technorati ((http://www.technorati.com) and Blo.gs ((http://www.blo.gs).

Quoth the How Appealing blog:

Look on the bright side, though: If my Web log is classified as "pornography," perhaps some actual pornography has been classified as a Web log devoted to appellate litigation.

(indeed, that probably has happened somewhere!).

I suspect this is a similar situation to my censorware report:

CyberPatrol - 247 bans for the price of 1

That described 247 sites blacklisted as "Partial Nudity, Nudity, Sex Acts/Text", and we never even found what site they wanted to target! Interestingly enough, it also began with the blacklisting of a law site, in that case http://www.archerlaw.com/.

If any lawyers or journalists are reading this, and want to back me up in these investigations, let me know! Deep censorware work is NOT risk-free. (and if anyone has a way to make this my job, even better!)

Thanks to Math class for poets: law and life and email for the information.

By Seth Finkelstein | posted in censorware | on February 14, 2003 05:34 PM (Infothought permalink) | Followups
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog (Wikipedia, Google, censorware, and an inside view of net-politics) - Syndicate site (subscribe, RSS)

Subscribe with Bloglines      Subscribe in NewsGator Online  Google Reader or Homepage