It seems networks are effectively blacklisting websites that are perceived as corrupting, but in reality the reverse is true.

Networks are supposed to censor sites such as pornographic websites unless adults ask for the ban to be lifted.

However, it appears that while everyone thinks this is a noble way to protect children, networks are also blanket banning particular sites that they think are not suitable. This has resulted in some bizarre bans, such as a website built by residents of St Margarets in Middlesex.

This particular site acts as an online centre for the people of the village, but it also has a blog that looks into the impartiality of the BBC. Whether it is this last facet that has caused the website to be censored is not known, but some experts have argued that if true then it is an attack on free speech.

The news came about after the London School of Economics compiled a report to look at censorship. The report suggests that this blacklisting has gone too far at times, and goes on to say: “It can mean a business is cut off from a slice of its market. It can simply see people unable to get directions to a bar. It may stop a prominent political organisation from reaching concerned citizens.”

As many sites are also accessible by smartphones and other mobile gadgets, it could be a case that an individual travelling to an area may want instant information, but this is denied simply because a network has blocked it.