Unhappy Meal: Pornography at McDonald


Should people who watch pornography in 'family restaurants' be banned from the establishments?  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Should people who watch pornography in 'family restaurants' be banned from the establishments?

    • Yes!
      40
    • No!
      20


Recommended Posts

TORONTO - Jill-Anne Hopkins always considered McDonald?s a family restaurant.

That changed Sunday when she had to shield her eight-year-old?s ears from loud, explicit pornography in the next booth over.

Hopkins was enjoying cheeseburgers with her ex-husband and their son, Grant, in a Keswick McDonald?s around 6 p.m. when they heard a woman?s voice say sultrily, ?I want you to come over here and f--- me.?

Startled, she looked over and noticed a man on his laptop chatting to a topless woman on a webcam sex site.

?My son?s head popped right up and said, ?Who said that??? she said. ?I said, ?Someone with a bad potty mouth who doesn?t realize there are children at McDonald?s.? And then the talk continued. I don?t know if he was touching himself under the table.?

As Hopkins, 43, moved her family over to another spot across the virtually-deserted fast-food joint on Woodbine Ave., she heard the woman on the computer hiss, ?By the way, tell that broad to go f--- herself. Did she hear me or should I say it louder??

The family finished their meal and while Grant was in the play area, Hopkins approached the manager and told her about the man, who appeared to be in his mid-20s, watching porn. The manager spoke to the man, but he didn?t leave for another 20 minutes. She doesn?t know whether he shut down the website.

Hopkins said because the restaurant chain provides free wireless Internet to customers, the company should be responsible for making sure inappropriate videos can?t be accessed at their locations.

?They didn?t even come over and apologize that my son had to see that,? she said, adding a customer representative was rude to her when she called to complain the next day. ?I would like an apology. Who watches porn with children around??

McDonald?s Canada said it?s impossible to tell whether the man in question was accessing the Internet through their free Wi-Fi or through another network or wireless stick.

Customers accessing the Wi-Fi must agree to their terms and conditions, which include not viewing pornography, McDonald?s spokesman Stephanie Sorensen said. There are also filters switched on preventing offensive material.

?We would absolutely ask them to stop watching it,? Sorensen said. ?We?re a family restaurant. There are a lot of sites that are banned.?

Sorensen said the company on Thursday reviewed video footage of the incident, which captures Hopkins? family and the man on his computer.

?The gentleman was conducting a webcam conversation and wearing ear buds as he is hearing impaired,? she said. ?In approaching the gentleman, the restaurant manager on duty witnessed nothing inappropriate but did confirm it was a webcam conversation with a female. The manager asked him to lower his voice and avoid using any profanity (which the customer said he was using). The gentleman apologized and agreed to do so.?

McDonald?s added the customer service representative Hopkins dealt with on the phone apologized and advised her of the content filtering software.

?(They) were under the impression the customer was satisfied with how the situation was handled both in the restaurant and on the call,? Sorensen said.

http://www.torontosu...alds-upsets-mom

Last I checked, a topless woman (in Canada at least) isn't considered pornography. So he was, strictly speaking, abiding by the terms & conditions of the WiFi usage. Yeah, he shouldn't have been using profanity there, but otherwise, I really don't see where he did anything else wrong.

Fair enough, what happened here was no story and could happen anywhere really. Tbh the guy should've been arrested for broadcasting it in a public area, that would be more suitable action rather than asking him to turn it off politely. It's not loud music, it's porn for goodness sake.

As far as access goes, he could've just VPN'd out, some proxy server or whatever. McD's can do their best, but you can't block all methods on open PC's easily.

misleading title. He wasn't watching porn he was video chatting with a topless girl. I have friends that don't like wearing clothes when they get home, they walk around topless even if I go over to hang out.

  • Like 2

As the article stated, they can't even be sure he was using the restaurant's WiFi. And again, a webcam chat with a topless woman (if she even was topless, since the manager couldn't confirm that) isn't really porn. If it were, there are lots of PG-13 rated movies out there that are porn as well.

Hopkins was enjoying cheeseburgers with her ex-husband and their son, Grant, in a Keswick McDonald?s around 6 p.m. when they heard a woman?s voice say sultrily, ?I want you to come over here and f--- me.?

Startled, she looked over and noticed a man on his laptop chatting to a topless woman on a webcam sex site.

rofl that's priceless

BTW i can't answer the pool as the guy was not actually watching porn but having a web cam chat.

Down here, you can watch free porn driving down the interstate. I've seen it dozens of times...large SUV with the drop-down video screen for the DVD player. True story! ;)

I'm sorry for the people that had to witness or go through that, though. McD's is NOT the place you go to do anything like THAT. Sick-o! :crazy:

misleading title. He wasn't watching porn he was video chatting with a topless girl. I have friends that don't like wearing clothes when they get home, they walk around topless even if I go over to hang out.

Ontario you say?

Hmmm...

Glassed Silver:mac

  • Like 3

Maybe not technically illegal but a bit of a disrespectful thing to do in a restaurant that you know is attended by families and children. I'm pretty liberal in all but in my opinion he overstepped the line. McDonalds also took far too long to kick him out IMO.

misleading title. He wasn't watching porn he was video chatting with a topless girl. I have friends that don't like wearing clothes when they get home, they walk around topless even if I go over to hang out.

It's the Toronto Sun, so not surprising of them to throw things out of context. :rolleyes:

Last I checked, a topless woman (in Canada at least) isn't considered pornography. So he was, strictly speaking, abiding by the terms & conditions of the WiFi usage. Yeah, he shouldn't have been using profanity there, but otherwise, I really don't see where he did anything else wrong.

True. In public spaces anyway. There's a nude beach somewhere here...

But McDonald's and other private establishments can and should enforce house rules. You're there at a restaurant to eat and chat, not be disruptive to other patrons. Same thing applies if this guy were to cyber chat in a library.

Well McDonald's did change their restaurants to be more adult oriented, instead of being designed for children.

Now that you mention it, the modern day Play Places are quite lame, if a particular location still has a Play Place.

  • Like 1

True. In public spaces anyway. There's a nude beach somewhere here...

But McDonald's and other private establishments can and should enforce house rules. You're there at a restaurant to eat and chat, not be disruptive to other patrons. Same thing applies if this guy were to cyber chat in a library.

Now that you mention it, the modern day Play Places are quite lame, if a particular location still has a Play Place.

Play Places here are actually pretty nice, depending on the location. My point about the topless woman is that legally there would be no difference between the guy talking to a topless man and a topless woman. Neither would (or should) be considered pornography in this instance. If there were other things being shown on the screen, then yeah, but the manager didn't witness anything inappropriate, which leads me to believe that the woman was having a hissy fit and making up details to make her story get more attention than it deserved.

  • Like 3

If McDonalds tried to go adult only, they'd lose a lot of business. IMO not worth doing so an incredibly tiny portion of their customers can watch pr0n on their free wifi.

Maybe not technically illegal but a bit of a disrespectful thing to do in a restaurant that you know is attended by families and children. I'm pretty liberal in all but in my opinion he overstepped the line. McDonalds also took far too long to kick him out IMO.

You might want to read over the article again. They didn't kick him out. The manager spoke to him, saw nothing inappropriate, but asked him to not use profanity, which he agreed to.

You might want to read over the article again. They didn't kick him out. The manager spoke to him, saw nothing inappropriate, but asked him to not use profanity, which he agreed to.

In that case then, McDonalds screwed up as well. The kids may not hear the swearing but they'd only have to look over at the screen to see what was happening.

There is a time and a place for everything. I don't consider McDonald's (or any public place really) as a proper place for that kind of activity. Seeing a man or a woman naked on a computer screen is no different than seeing them actually sitting in a booth naked.

Play Places here are actually pretty nice, depending on the location. My point about the topless woman is that legally there would be no difference between the guy talking to a topless man and a topless woman. Neither would (or should) be considered pornography in this instance. If there were other things being shown on the screen, then yeah, but the manager didn't witness anything inappropriate, which leads me to believe that the woman was having a hissy fit and making up details to make her story get more attention than it deserved.

Yeah the Play Places used to be nice as a kid... I can't tell for sure if they're dumbing them down :p

Also while legally being topless is fine for both genders, many except for a few women still perceive topless women in public in a negative manner, automatically leading to pornographic calls. These are the same folks that cried foul over our new plastic $20 bill, which contained a war memorial with - yup - breasts. http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/11/dirty-money-is-canadas-new-20-bill-pornographic/

What you said could also be possible. But on the other hand, it's also possible the man was indeed cyber sexing with a topless lady (who apparently has just as much of an attitude as the mother in this story) and hid the window before the manager could intervene.

In that case then, McDonalds screwed up as well. The kids may not hear the swearing but they'd only have to look over at the screen to see what was happening.

What part of the line "the manager saw nothing inappropriate" are you not understanding? We only have the word of mother that there was ever anything "pornographic" on the screen. In most parts of Canada, a woman can legally walk down the street topless, so how is it suddenly pornographic if she happens to appear on someone's computer screen that way? The mother never even claimed to have seen anything on the screen other than a topless woman. No sexual acts, no genitals, nothing. I'll take the word of the restaurant manager over a hysterical busybody mother any day.

What you said could also be possible. But on the other hand, it's also possible the man was indeed cyber sexing with a topless lady (who apparently has just as much of an attitude as the mother in this story) and hid the window before the manager could intervene.

The manager confirmed that he was doing a video chat with a woman (which I assume means that the chat window was still up), but saw nothing inappropriate. The only issue the manager had was with his language.

This really does sound like a case of the woman being offended by the language her kids heard, then embellishing the story to make it sound even worse. We only have her word to go on that the woman on the screen was even topless.

  • Like 3

When I was at a Denny's in VA beach this forum was blocked on thier Wifi for bad content... I was like WTF? and switched to 3G.... It was a crappy denny's too!!!!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!