bt garner writes in with a story that shows why having corporate web filtering technology might not always make sense. In this case, a UK news organization broadcast a report about kids playing on railway lines and posted a website address along with the story. It turns out that the website address (broadcast mid-day) sent people to a hardcore porn site. It's not entirely clear why the station felt the need to include the URL, but they're not getting in trouble for it. In reviewing the case, Ofcom is letting them off the hook because the news organization says they tried to check the website before including it in the broadcast, but were blocked by their own corporate web filter. So, without being able to see it, they figured it must be fine to list the website (which probably should have set off alarms in the first place). You would think that, of all places, a news organization would realize that having a web filter in place is, at some point, going to interfere with actual news gathering.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- NSA FOIA Response Claims Data On Vendor Contracts 'Unsearchable'
- Eric Schmidt Claims Google Considered Moving Its Servers Out Of The US To Avoid The NSA
- DailyDirt: Not So Secret Nuclear Weapons
- Apparently James Clapper And The NSA Don't See Eye-To-Eye On Transparency
- 2009: Man Buys 5000 Bitcoins For $27, Forgets About Them. 2013: Man Rediscovers His Bitcoins, Now Worth $886,000