There are two headline stories of interest on Reuters at present, and I'm astonished to report that "What are you doing here?": man asks wife at brothel plays second fiddle to this one, which notes that Britain's minister for culture is planning to consult with incoming American pres Barack Obama in order to draw up international ratings rules for English-language websites - much in the manner that the MPAA rates movies.

Under Andy Burnham's proposal, some nebulous international agency or group would have the responsibility of determining whether a website's content was suitable for children. (Or not.) What would then be done with the rating is entirely open to conjecture, but mention is made that some sites might simply be eliminated from an ISP's offering if deemed too raunchy, graphic, shocking or what have you.

Which begs the question: what rating would pegasusnews.com receive, if (for instance) the MPAA were poring over it now? I'm thinking a solid PG-13. Though Amazon is shaping up for a solid R, judging by some of their book jackets.

(Wait a minute: if I link to a site that's "R-rated," does that make my site "R-rated," also? And if a search engine leads one to spicy fare, does that mean the search engine site is unsuitable for kids?)

The logistics here could prove labyrinthine. I can only hope the agency heads select a leader of discernment who can rise to the challenge.