Why is this headline news?
Jan. 12th, 2004 08:51 amEvidence that it's a no news day today, all the newspapers, radio and TV news are saying how child porn has increased 1,500% since 1988 thanks to the net. Well that's not new news, the net didn't exist in 1988, at least it wasn't commonly available. Also they're now worried about mobile phones capable of playing video increasing the chance that dirty old men will get their hands on child porn through anonymous pay-as-you go schemes. Does anyone else think that this is all a bit over sensationalised? It's like the Brass Eye Paedophile Special all over again.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 01:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 03:13 am (UTC)1988 is when the kiddy-porn offences first entered the statute book: a large part of the rise will simply be police forces learning to use a new piece of legislation.
The article does not say that the number of people interested in kiddy porn has increased, nor that the number of distinct offending images has increased.
It doesn't even say the number of people having images has increased, or that the number of images they each have has increased — though it seems plausible that each might be the case.
All it says is that the number of offenders charged or cautioned has increased 1500%. If one offers no further data, the default interpretation of that single piece of evidence has to be that the Internet has improved detection of child porn offences by 1500%. That's a good thing, surely? (-8
(I keep meaning to set up www.bogus-statistics.org, but am aware that if I did a good job it would become a higher-bandwidth site than I could handle.)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 07:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 08:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 07:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 03:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 09:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 02:45 pm (UTC)