We’d like to welcome you to INQ, Crikey’s ambitious new inquiry journalism initiative. Starting June 24, INQ investigative reporting — lifting the rocks, connecting the dots, following the money trail and exposing misuse of power — will appear regularly in Crikey.
We look forward to sharing this exciting new phase with you.
Tamsin Creed, Publisher
Stephen Conroy rants at Google and Facebook. But he hasn't worked out that they don't play that game, and aren't that interested in what governments think.
Stephen Conroy is taking on internet giants Google and Facebook over their recent privacy breaches. But is he just capitalising on the public sentiment against the two companies to take the heat off his widely-panned internet filter plans?
Stephen Conroy last night warned the Government would consider blocking up to 50,000 websites, before launching an attack on euthanasia websites and Facebook, reports Bernard Keane.
Stephen Conroy's controversial internet filter has been placed on the backburner in the hope that it won't become a major election issue. But stay alert, writes Ross Fitzgerald, the internet filter will come back even more draconian than ever.
Stephen Conroy's response on the internet filter didn't end the debate -- in fact, he appears to have opened up some new issues, including one with Google.
ISP filtering is just one component of the government's cyber-safety policy, writes Senator Stephen Conroy.
Mark Day defends the Minister Stephen Conroy's plan to filter Australia's web content with a challenge to its critics: if you don't like it, make a plausible case for why we need access to "online bestiality or child sex abuse". Them's fightin' words.
The debate over internet censorship has moved to the global centre stage, with Hillary Clinton declaring free access to information online as critical a human right. Will Rudd get on board? asks Colin Jacobs.
The tech community hasn't done much of a job of persuading mainstream Australia that proposed internet censorship laws are a bad idea, despite their potentially crippling effect on freedom of speech, writes Angus Kidman.