Battle Rages Over Australia's Internet Filter

[cory777]

Source: Time

The concept of government-backed web censorship is usually associated with nations where human rights and freedom of speech are routinely curtailed. But if Canberra's plans for a mandatory Internet filter go ahead, Australia may soon become the first Western democracy to join the ranks of Iran, China and a handful of other nations where access to the Internet is restricted by the state.

Plans for a mandatory Internet filter have been a long-term subject of controversy since they were first announced by Stephen Conroy, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in May 2008 as part of an $106 million "cybersafety plan." The plan's stated purpose is to protect children when they go online by preventing them from stumbling on illegal material like child pornography. To do this, Conroy's Ministry has recommended blacking out about 10,000 websites deemed by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to be so offensive that they are categorized as 'RC,' or Refused Classification.

The government won't reveal an official list of the URLs on the current blacklist, but Conroy's office says it includes sites containing child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and/or material that advocates the doing of a terrorist act. "Under Australia's existing this material is not available in news agencies, it is not on library shelves, you cannot watch it on a DVD or at the cinema and it is not shown on television," Conroy's office e-mailed in a statement. But in March 2009, when a 2,395-site blacklist was leaked to Wikileaks, an online clearinghouse for anonymous submissions, it seemed confusingly broad, containing, among others, the websites of a dentist from Queensland, a pet-care facility in Queensland, and a site belonging to a school cafeteria consultant.

At the time, Conroy told the Sydney Morning Herald that any Australians involved in the leak could face criminal charges. "No one interested in cyber safety would condone the leaking of this list," he said.


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1995615,00.html?xid=rss-world&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Fworld+%28TIME%3A+Top+World+Stories%29

[WillParkinson]

1. "No one interested in cyber safety would condone the leaking of this list," he said.

I would.

If you're sure you're protecting the people why do you need to hide what you're protecting them from? A dentist? A pet-care facility? And a school cafeteria consultant.

So let's see...the dentist puts wireless transmitters in your teeth. The pet care facility is training suicide bone bombers and you're protecting people from the mystery meat. All logical answers so just step up and admit it.

[Fearless]

9. Well they need to keep people afraid to keep them safe!

:banghead:

[JackInGreen]

2. as those of us that know

haters gonna hate, you can't stop the signal, this is why the gods created proxies.

[DeSwiss]

3. K&R

"Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime." ~ Potter Stewart

[happygoluckytoyou]

4. the australians can't handle the truth.... need the protection of their government....

sad but true... so busy for years putting shrimps on barbies and playing with their dingos, the australian people cannot handle the world news.

[Violet_Crumble]

11. Are you for real??

You do realise that the world news we get here in Australia is far less limited than what you get in the US? And that the filter has nothing to do with world news at all? Just an fyi, but Australia ranked better than the US when it came to press freedom in 2009. And that while some Australians probably share an affinity with some Americans and have an aversion to the truth, the fact is that most ISPs already filter content for their users and as someone who's really not too fussed on stumbling onto kiddy porn or bestiality, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to notice this filter if it comes into being. In fact, I'd probably be looking in yr own backyard first, because the US has gotten pretty heavy-handed with different forms of censorship and a restriction on people's freedom during its history. Here in Australia it hasn't been made illegal for us to participate in a boycott of another country, while in the US it has been. In the US national security has often been used as an excuse to use censorship (eg communists during the Cold War, and later on terrorists).

But what the hell would I know? I've been too busy playing with my shrimp, Steve, and throwing dingos on a barbie, all the while wondering to myself why Americans are so obese, racist and stupid and fond of making stupid generalisations about other populations! ;)

[leftofcool]

5. Coming soon to an America near you...........

[Fearless]

10. Could already have for all we know...

[AsahinaKimi]

6. scarey

Are we next?

[LaurenG]

7. Safety? What is so freaking dangerous that antivirus software

malware, spyware a good firewall and parental control can't handle? Keep people in need of safety and soon they won't have any rights because as we all know fear and scare tactics go a really long way in keeping people contained.

edit: clarify

[Sentath]

8. What is so dangerous?

thoughts

[Enthusiast]

12. This is ugly.

And don't think for a moment that it can't happen here.