ISP filtering: who’s exploiting the kids?
|
The drive to impose unprecedented internet censorship by the Federal Government is being backed by an otherwise-disparate group of family, left-wing and Christian groups and campaigners. The serious push for ISP-level filtering began in the last months of the Howard Government when it backflipped on a long-standing opposition to it, having hitherto preferred to support PC-based filtering. In response to Labor’s “clean-feed” policy announced by Kim Beazley, Howard announced in August 2007 that the Coalition was committing to optional ISP-level filtering in a webcast to religious groups organised by the Australian Christian Lobby, a s-x-obsessed Christian lobbying group. In response, the Rudd Opposition strengthened its own plans for mandatory filtering. The ACL remains a strong supporter of mandatory filtering and applauded the Government’s renewed blocking of ACT plans for same-s-x civil unions. You know about the political pressures for filtering. The Howard Government and its Communications Minister Helen Coonan had come under repeated, and frequently hysterical, attack from Christian fundamentalist Senator Steve Fielding, who boasted of using his Parliament House PM to find p-rnography “two clicks away”. Fielding continues to demand mandatory filtering and a ban on internet alcohol advertising, but he is by no means alone. Tasmanian Liberal and anti-abortion Christian Guy Barnett is equally vociferous in his calls for censorship, having told Parliament, improbably, in 2005 “even in our own homes, you go home, turn on your home computer and bingo-out come the p-rnographic sites.” Nick Xenophon wants a ban on overseas gambling websites. Family and child abuse groups are also strong supporters. The Courier Mail reported last week that the Australian Childhood Foundation backed ISP-level filtering, because “a link existed between children viewing s-xual images on the net and engaging in inappropriate s-xualised behaviour.” The ACF is receiving over a million dollars in support from the Federal Government between 2004-09, with CEO Dr Joe Tucci a favourite of ministers eager to get some family protection credibility. The CourierMail also aired the views of child psychologist and media tart Michael Carr-Gregg, self-described as “one of Australia’s highest profile psychologists” and perhaps even “Australia’s own Dr Phil”. Carr-Gregg, a fellow Sunrise alumnus of Kevin Rudd, is a long-term moral panic merchant on youth issues such as binge drinking and internet use. Carr-Gregg told the Courier Mail that internet p-rn had made “oral and an-l s-x” “almost normalised among 13-year-olds”. Bernadette McMenamin, CEO of Childwise, also supported ISP-level filtering in January but has since suggested she does not support the Federal Government’s proposal. The Australia Institute has also supported mandatory filtering for several years. In 2006, Clive Hamilton accused the Howard Government of putting “the interests of the internet industry ahead of those of parents who are deeply concerned about this problem”. And as Stilgherrian pointed out yesterday in Crikey, Australian Women Online “is not opposed to the concept of mandatory ISP filtering” and complained of being “hounded”, “harassed” and “bullied” by mandatory filtering opponents. The concerned mother cited in the Courier Mail, Bernice Watson, who supports mandatory filtering, has been an officer for the Queensland Office for Women. The campaign for internet censorship seems to have reunited some of the element of the campaign against p-rnography, which brought normally hostile feminist, left-wing and Christian groups together to attack free speech. However, the elevation of children as the justification for censorship will make this campaign harder to stop. Who’s exploiting the kids here? |
|
|
|
10 Comments
Well said Greg Angelo. I am in complete agreement. Why is it when these mad fundamentalist Christian groups set out to “protect innocent little children”, they have no compunction about screwing up the life of adults?
Reports have said that such filters could reduce the speed of computers by 80%. If this is the case how dare these people dictate to us and tell us ‘tough, the kiddie widdies are more important.’ Forcing censorship on adults for such a specious argument as protecting kids is an exercise in futility. The bright kids will soon find their way around it and the stupid kids will be trundled off to join the footy team. The cricket team, and so on.
What’s next on the agenda for all those freaking Christian fundamentalists? Book burning in Bertchesgarten? And so the world of Oz is to be dragged down to the same filth and sewerage which runs like rivers through the minds of professional Christians. Shame! Shame!
ISP level filtering is the type of information repression that exists in dictatorships such as China and North Korea, and to a lesser extent in a number of predominantly Moslem nations such as Malaysia and Saudia Arabia where I understand all internet traffic is monitored by a police agency.
Installation of these control facilities it is of limited use as many of these controls can be evaded by determined individuals with the appropriate skill but the majority of the community is precluded from accessing the information that the “net nanny”’ decides should not be viewed.
Freedom of information and freedom of expression is the cornerstone of our democratic system and restrictions on information access should be resisted. I am old enough to remember the absurd censorship issues of the 50s and 60s when repressive ideologues tried to ban books such as Lady Chatterley’s Lover, the Catcher in the Rye and Portnoy’s Complaint.
Notwithstanding this, penalties for dissemination and possession of child pornography, bestiality and sexual sado-masochism should be strengthened.
It is bad enough that right wing Christian ideologues brainwash their children with creationist rubbish and stories that the earth is 6000 years old. I do not want them in setting the standards of information access to the community. How long before the Christian fundamentalists want to ban discussion on evolution?
I would be far happier if the advocates of internet filtering developed their own software to put on their own computer desktops restricting access to information which they find unpleasant or unsatisfactory to their particular religious or social views. On this basis they could protect the delicate minds of their children until they are old enough as reasonably mature individuals to make informed decisions about their own access to information.
Protecting kids from things like porn is a good thing and has to be supported. However having laws that stop adults from accessing such material is nothing short of censorship as practiced in charming places like Iran, China, and North Korea.
Once these laws pass any government can tighten the screws to include any other subject they choose. Why is internet porn such a huge problem here, but doesn’t rate much of a mention in Europe? The answer is pretty simple. Firstly the idea of having government interference in what you can see or read is abhorrent to most. Secondly the parents take on the roll of responsible adult and put filters on their computers if they are concerned. Seems to work quite well. A concept apparently lost on our society and by extension our law makers.
In this country we are all too happy to abdicate personal responsibility for the comfort of an ever increasing noose of government interference in our everyday lives. Its a bit like boiling frogs, given slow heat increase they don’t know that they are being cooked until its too late.
My grandfather had a great insight into the thinking and the workings of governments. He used to say “Politicians will eagerly take away your freedoms with the stroke of a pen. The only way you will regain those freedoms is at the point of a bayonet.” He ought to know what he was on about, after all he fought his way with the 5th International Brigade through the Spanish civil war in 1936.
Having said all this, I despair at what is happening in this country for the past 2 decades. Hark I hear the heavy trod of hobnail boots coming down the road.
Never mind, have another beer and watch the footie, its all too hard to deal with.
Bernard, I enjoy and value your articles, but this is the first time I detect an element of raving.
This is not an attack on free speech, nor child exploitation.
Keep doing what you do well, please.
Jean
dad had pornos in the cupboard…people”” is more explicite than they were…i am 37 years old and this stuff is all around…wow it is everywhere…and i mean it is everywhere…jennifer… megan …anyone…it is melbourne cup day after ALL…………….!
Which left-wing groups are backing this, exactly?
“Senator Steve Fielding, who boasted of using his Parliament House PM to find p-rnography “two clicks away”.
First rule. If you don’t like it, don’t look. Second rule. If you don’t want to see it, don’t look for it. What a wally.
Child pornography groups do not operate out in the open on the internet. It’s already hidden. A “filter” won’t make any difference. The government is proposing to restrict access to information based on a secret blacklist that has no Parliamentary oversight or auditing procedures. The current blacklist is also secret and not overseen by the Parliament. No-one could seriously propose that this won’t be abused for political purposes in the future. Even if it was never abused for political purposes, how would you know. That’s the principle of the censorship in Iran, North Korea and China.
The current generation of parenting age grew up since computers were in school and in most workplaces as a matter of routine. They cannot claim the ignorance that older generations can legitimately claim. Do we really have a group of adults claiming they are too stupid to manage their own children?
Every single member of the Labor party is responding to questions from constituents with some sort of script. All the answers are exactly the same whether in person, by email or by post. It doesn’t seem to matter which local member is asked. Very strange.
The internet is like a shopping mall - full of bright, shiny things next to everyday things like newagents, supermarkets and toy shops. You can choose whether to buy or not. You can choose when to go home and when to stay home. It’s your call. Would you let a child wander about a major shopping mall on their own?
More needs to be heard about this issue and not from the so called interested parties. I’ve emailed by MP (still waiting for a response) to see what he’s got to say. I suggest anyone concerned about this do so too. I’m very tired of being told what I can watch, read or listen too. There are no children in my house and the PC is password protected - so whats the problem? Its up to parents to supervise their children’s internet access, not anyone else.
ISP level filtering would be a total disaster and achieve very little that can’t be achieved using PC based filtering. My experience of filtering through work has been ridiculously painful and at an ISP level it would be unworkable. These are the outcomes for different groups as I see them:
Children whose parents don’t want them to see porn: Good, no porn. But, there’s no advantage over PC based filtering
Children who want porn: They’ll find it. Regardless of the filtering peer-to-peer transfers will not be filtered
Adults who want porn: Painful. Will probably have to call their ISP and request access to “Bears from the far North.com”
But the worst group is people who don’t care, which is the majority. Their service will be slow and unreliable as every transaction goes through another process. Also, there’ll be random denials of access because of flaws in the programming. I had ‘spoof’ blocked at work yesterday, and the Quarterly Essay blocked because it was ‘Illegal content’. Lets all move to china and use their internet.
The pursuit of this topic is a grab for publicity by those involved more than anything. They’re loking for a concrete sign that they’re “getting things done”. Next we’ll have a “tough on crime” arms race as well.
maybe just amybe a case for parents to exert some responsibility here…
there is software which stops any website, including terrorists handbook, in my view far more dangerous!
however, in my experience it exposes the adult inthe house looking at publicly embarassing websites
the double standards are breathtaking
if p**n is the life blood of the internet…who are the consumers of the content!?
not all 13 year old males…though if their male parent has the habit..they possibly do not need to see the screen to have the attitude…
anyone with a computer connected to internet has a pipeline to anything…take some responsibility!