Internet Censorship for Australia?

The Federal Government is pushing forward with a plan to force ISPs to filter out all material "inappropriate" for children from Australian homes.

This plan will waste tens of millions of taxpayer dollars and slow down Internet access.

Despite being almost universally condemned by the public, ISPs, State Governments, Media and censorship experts, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home. Don't let him!

Although the final details of the filtering plans have been kept secret up to now, the Minister is on record as being firmly committed to a mandatory clean-feed internet to Australian homes, schools and public computers. A limited trial by the ACMA is already underway, with a "live" field trial to follow later this year. We must act fast before millions of dollars are squandered on this technically impractical and democratically unworkable solution in search of a problem. 

The Government is refusing to release concrete details on the plan. However, we know that ISP-level filtering has been ALP policy for some time and is being zealously pursued by the Minister. What we do know is this:

• The feed will be mandatory in all homes and schools across the country.
• The filter will censor material that is "harmful and inappropriate" for children.
• The filter will require a massive expansion of the ACMA's blacklist of prohibited content.
• The filter will target legal as well as illegal material.

• Will there be any way to opt out from the scheme?
• What age level is the country's Internet to be made appropriate for? 15? 10? 5 years old?
• Who decides what material is "appropriate" for Australians to see?
• Who will maintain the blacklist of prohibited sites?
• How can sites mistakenly added to the list be removed?

even if it worked the clean-feed filter would be terrible policy. By censoring the entire country's Internet access down to the level of a child of indeterminate age, it robs Australian adults of ability to make their own decisions about what content they view.

• Most Australians don't want the filter. Support for this overly broad policy is virtually non-existent, even from child-protection organisations. A recent survey shows that 51.5% of Australian net user strongly oppose the plan, while only 2.9% strongly support it.⁶
• One size doesn't fit all. A single filter list can't deliver results that are appropriate for all parents, teens and children, with no way to modify the filter for your household.
• The protection for children is minor at best, an illusion at worst. The filter does nothing to protect children from real threats like cyber-bullying, online sexual predators, viruses, or the theft of personal information. It may provide a false sense of security to parents, reducing effective monitoring of their children's online activities.
• The money is better spent elsewhere. The filter will cost tens of millions of dollars to attempt. Yet the Government's own studies admit education is more effective than filtering in protecting children, and that "content risks" are less dangerous than other risks.⁷
• No other democracy has such a scheme. Comparable systems in Europe only filter a handful of illegal sites, and then only to prevent accidental access. ⁸
• Those that want filtering already have it. The Government already offers filtering software to any home that requests it, free of charge.

If you care about your online rights, let the Minister know what you think of his plan to censor Australia's Internet.

To read more click the view button and visit No Clean Feed

Related Stories

Children's welfare groups slam net filters 5 dec  |  Children's welfare groups slam net filters . . read more

Australia government limited Google's bushfire map 18 feb  |  Australia government limited Google's bushfire map . . read more

Law Enforcement Disempowerment Not Just Rhetoric 10 dec  |  One of the key pieces of rhetoric from opponents of the proposed ISP level filtering scheme is that the money is better spent enabling law enforcement officials to do their jobs through better resourcing. This argument is compounded by details such as the Labor Government's recent removal of $2.8m from the increased funding for OCSET1 (The Australian Federal Police's Online Child Sexual Exploitation Team) but the insistence that it is still able to grow the team by about ninety members2. But does the proposed introduction of a mandatory filter actually directly indicate that less effort will be dedicated to law enforcement measures?  . . read more

Big brother filter plan insults parents 23 jan  |  Big brother filter plan insults parents  . . read more

Angry Aussie: Hardcore Porn in Australia 18 dec  |  Angry Aussie: Hardcore Porn in Australia . . read more

No Clean Feed! A Question for Stephen Conroy 26 mar  |  No Clean Feed! A Question for SteAustralia is still under threat of some pretty sever internet censorship even though everyone who has a clue has said it's a bad idea.phen Conroy . . read more

Read me before I'm Censored. 22 dec  |  It seems the Australian and Chinese governments are getting a bit too familiar than we would like. Barely a month after Barack Obama’s much publicised criticism of China’s censorship laws, Australia seems to be right on track for its own grasp at the Web. Why Krudd? Why do you keep doing this to yourself?- by Sumer Dayal . . read more