Comments on: Porn on a plane: Flight attendants want filters

Flight attendants ask American Airlines to use filtering technology to block porn from in-flight Internet access.

[groink_hi]

$12.95 to look at porn? That is stupidity in itself. You have a laptop. Just bring a video you BT'd. Or better yet, turn the laptop off and read a porn magazine. Or do what I do - SLEEP!!!!!!!

I'm probably one of a few people who doesn't need Internet access on a minute-to-minute basis. If you're a road warrior and believe that you need Internet access on an airplane in order to stay competitive and get your work done, then IMHO your entire business model AND work practices need to be re-checked. Your competitors are probably not as bad as you are. The more and more you people become much too attached to the digital lifestyle, the more you're giving up your comfort to your cell phone companies, your ISPs who overcharge you every month, and to an airline who, I repeat, charges $12.95 for Internet access. But if you want to be chained down like this, then be my guest. But please, with maple syrup, do not use the cell phone while driving, and don't be spanking the bishop in the airplane rest room.

[inachu]

I am against porn on a plane no matter if it is a 30 minute flight or a 12 hour flight.
The thing that might Irk me is if I am watching my own movie on my pc or it doe snot even have to be my own movie it could be a movie offered on the new little screens in front of me be in either case if the movie is rated "R" and is offered by the airline then nobody no matter who they may be better interupt me asking me to stop viewing the movie because of their outdated morals worthy of a loner woodsman in montanna.

[fordpw]

Bottom line. No one is saying looking at porn is a bad thing. However, for someone like my self who is extremely open minded, I think that viewing porn in any public place especially where there may be children present is completely out-of-line. Seriously, I mean if you need to look at it that bad you really need to seek help. What is happening to people, do they not incorporate morality filters at birth. You know if the reason why some of the laws in the US are soooo extreme is to incorporate people who have no normal filters in place, this is a perfect example of that. I think that AA should add all xxx adult related sites to their firewall blacklist ASAP and let other normal people leverage this great addition to AA's and other to be airlines service. Don't let these other idiots mess it up for everyone else. There are technologies out there at will limit internet site usage and quite frankly if not, put a login page for each user that only allows them to specify a real email address or add's in their seat number. If they browse these sites, log them and fine them or pass a law banning browsing inappropriate sites. Just make sure the lawyers are SPECIFIC, no vague as they normally are.

All the best

[Wreckless1223]

What everyone is forgetting here is that planes don't just have adults on them. Children are on the planes as well. They could be sitting behind or next to the person that is viewing the porn. Stewardesses should not have to worry about seeing something that might offend them. This changes the work environment and presents a situation they did not have to worry about when they took the job, but was brought on by their employer. I see law suits in the future for the airlines if porn is not blocked. Not only by the stewardesses, but by a passenger that gets upset that their underage son or daughter saw something they shouldn't have.

Planes are public places and porn is for viewing in private

[mikeburek]

Just wondering if they will later ban access to news about airplane crashes. Or try to ban people on the plane from posting that they have been sitting on the tarmac for 9 hours.

[asgrohs]

This is total BS, there has been nothing in place for years to prevent anyone from looking through pornographic magazine for in-flight; why should this be enforced any different? Airlines should not be in control of what people watch (nor read) and should let people self police this stuff as has worked quite well in years past. Embarrassment is an incredibly strong policy!

[RainCaster]

It should be all or nothing. Either the airlines provide us with 100% of the internet, or none of it. No shaping, filtering or limiting.

[David_Burt]

One concern this article doesn?t address is the very real possibility that forcing female flight attendants to be the porn police can create a hostile work environment. There is a well-known case, Adamson v. Minneapolis Public Library where a group of librarians who were subjected to porn-viewing library patrons won a $435,000 judgment. I have the full complaint from the librarians here, which is not reading for the faint of heart, on my blog at http://filteringfacts.org/legal/adamson/

--David Burt, filteringfacts.org

[techman21]

Unfortunately, you can't trust people to be considerate of those around them, and in close quarters like an airplane, it's best to block it. You can't help seeing what other people are looking at.

[JenniChasteen]

I think the answer is obvious. They airlines should not block anything because it would be unfair for a number of reasons, perhaps the most important of which: legitimate sites will be blocked for unfairly. This being the case however, create a policy that clearly states what type of content is unacceptable (such as images and videos with explicit scenes, etc) and enforce those policies (as discreetly as possible). If someone was doing anything obscene, the flight attendants would have to say something in that case as well... there's no filter on what someone can say or do, so why should this situation be treated differently?

[bemenaker]

It's not like people aren't watching porn DVD's on their portable players now. I've had the conversation with more than one flight attendant. Most of them just laugh and thinks it's pathetic.

[mrjzn]

Wow ... tech. discussion, no comments. Mention pr0n and everyone has something to say. :|

To the actual topic/question:
Depending on the level of federal strings legally (i.e. financially) tied to them as a company ... can't they set their own policy on filtering? My vote would be to filter due to the close-quarters environment. I mean, you would hope people have enough sense and/or sensitivity to understand how bad an idea it obviously is to view such things on a plane (mixed company, kids, etc. etc.), but history (and daily life) has shown otherwise.

[Tech-Guy]

As others have mentioned, the fact that you're paying for the service doesn't make a difference on whether they filter it or not. The airlines are NOT public access points- they are private APs, and they can filter their services however they want. Its an optional charge you incur, so if you don't like that you can't watch porn or p2p while in flight, don't buy it.

I personally think they should filter it. You can go several hours without porn, and besides- people would spend too much time in the bathroom. :-P

[csUser]

You can't ban PORN!! What am I going to do on the 24 hr flight to Japan? At least take off the filter for those who are looking at it in the bathroom.

[jandler]

Just gas everyone so everyone will sleep and shut up and wake everyone up upon destination.

[kkohnen]

Heck.

The airlines need the money.

Have 2 tiered pricing.

$12.95 filtered.
$29.95 unfiltered.

(Are we becoming a nanny state or what?!?!)

[Heebee Jeebies]

While it may be a little tacky to view such material on a flight in such close quarters to other who may not be interested in possibly glimpsing the material. However, if you are going pay for access and use your own equipment (laptop, etc.) then I feel they have no right to say anything.

Now once you have entered the airspace of a country that doesn't permit such material then everyone should have to turn it off. But, in a free country and your paying for it. Let them do what they want.

Frankly, I would be more concerned with what the passengers were doing to themselves as they watched the material in question. Some stains you just don't want to explain.

Robert

[fdunn3]

Either offer Internet access or not.
Censorship is not an option since who is to say what is offensive.
Next they will be wanting to censor online games because they are too violent.
What's next?
If they don't want to see it then don't look.
On the other hand if it is an illegal type of graphic files then get the Air Marshall.

[kpj2]

Mullendarrell -I need to remind you you're discussion is about techniques and not standards. Access to sites deemed "inappropriate" within that environment can absolutely be made unavailable. I probably know a bit more about (client-side and server-side) internet filtering than you do.

[mtf612]

I totally think that this sort of thing would need to be regualated.

1) Do you want to sit next to some guy wanking it to some disgusting crazy video ?

2) Little kids + porn + parents = lawsuit

3) Porn shouldnt be veiwed in public ever. nuff said

HOWEVER THE BIG ISSUE IS

How in the hell do they filter it ? Block all images and video s = no point in browsing at all. Block sites registered and tagged as porn = your gonna kill a lot of sites, but still many sites (chans, youtube, modeling sites, etc etc) contain "soft core" porn and or nudity (and in some cases extream porn as well) . There is no way to fully stop the content.


I dont know why someone might do it anyway, but remember- we have had laptops on planes for years: TO MY KNOWLEDGE no passanger in the past 5 years has taken their laptop and loaded up a folder of porn on the plane, or put a porn dvd in the portable dvd player, or even looked at a magazine (in the sense of flailing it around for all to see)