When the like of search engine corporations such as Google and Yahoo pledge their support behind a movement such as the Safer Internet Group which is against the government’s current policy of content filtering for the Internet, you know there must be something fundamentally wrong.

Firstly, I’d like to point out that the search engine giants are not directly opposing the government’s Internet content filtering propositions, moreover they are seemingly suggesting that there are far better and more effective methods for achieving a practical outcome. Furthermore, they are also concerned with the primary fundamentals behind the the individual rights of people and the importance of the flowing of information.

Sue Hutley from ALIA ‘Australian Library and Information Association’, says a more effective way to protect our children from the Internet shortcomings was to work together with and through education, policing, technical measures and ISP’s along with government and police agencies.

For example, suggestions that child sex abuse stems from general Internet use (which an Internet Content Filtering system would intervene) is largely untrue as this type of activity is not found in the public domain, but more so in the chat rooms and across organised ‘peer to peer’ networks that the filter could not prevent.

The government’s Internet Content filtering message is essentially giving parents the wrong idea and thus possibly planting a false sense of security according to statements made by the SIA. As more and more evidence presents itself to the contrary, along with the gradually awareness in the public domain, perhaps the government might want to take a step back and ‘listen’ for a change or perhaps get filtered out of the publics collective consciousness come the next election.

… Oh, and by the way, it doesn’t help when you hear remarks such as wishing ‘Australia was more like China’ in regards to censorship and filtering coming from the Federal Minister of Broadband and Communication himself, Senator Stephen Conroy.

Many concerned people (including those with a technology background) appear to be quite sceptical with the ability (or lack thereof) of an Internet Content Filter to catch all the correct information, especially without wiping out legitimate copy. Much of what the senator says they are aiming to eradicate cannot be accessed by general Internet browsing anyway. Child pornographic channels are believed to be that covert and sophisticated that they secretly operate through peer to peer (private networks) which can also get around the general Content Filtering.

On the flipside many believe that Content Filtering is essentially laying the foundation for total control and accountability purposes. An example of the additional control abilities that the powers that be will attain by the introduction of such a filter is the permissions the government will obtain to wipe anything they see fit from the Internet. I guess it’s about principle. Although the good Senator may say there is checks and balances in place for this to be prevented, it’s still laying the foundation for such abuse to potentially happen.

Others argue that ‘Big Brother’ is stepping in to do the jobs of Mothers and Fathers. In the ‘real world’ an individual has the right to do what they want right? ‘Freedom of will’? Sure we want to prevent much of the bad freedom of will occuring, however god (or whatever you would like to refer to as god), gave men and women the choice. Simply speaking, there is an arguement for an alternative whereby the government could provide ‘free content filtering software’ for Mothers and Fathers to install on their local machines, make all schools and institutions install respective software and employ agencies to stringently monitor the Internet for these obscenities….. Why? because many believe there is hidden agenda involved. Well that’s the picture that I see much of the opposing parties painting.

In any case, Internet Content Filtering is a very controversial topic. This may not be the case for you, however it’s something that warrants the need to be explored extensively and made known to everyone so that they can ‘make their own’ mind up. If you would like further information on Internet Content Filtering and upcoming Protest Rallies, check out the links below.

Block The Filter
Type: Causes – Protest
Network: Global
Date: Saturday, March 6, 2010
Time: 12:00pm – 3:00pm
Location: Your nearest capital city

Taken from Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=200213317223&ref=nf

Block the Filter
http://www.block-the-filter.org/home.html

 Electronic Frontiers Australia – Senate Internet Censorship Petition
http://www.efa.org.au/epetition/

 Lights Out initiative
From Monday, January 25th to Friday, January 29th, Aussie websites will turn their lights out — “black out” — to inform Australians about the threat of imposed Internet censorship.

Join your website to the Blackout
We’ve created a very easy way to participate in the Great Australian Internet Blackout. Ahead of blackout week, please put the following HTML snippet just above the closing </body> tag on your website’s front page:

<script src=”http://www.internetblackout.com.au/ib/blackout.js”></script>

Taken from
http://www.internetblackout.com.au/websites/

Email the Senator
Email you’re dissatisfaction directly to Mr Stephen Conroy
senator.conroy@aph.gov.au.

More Info/Articles
http://www.nocleanfeed.com/
http://getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet/442
http://greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/net-filter-report-signals-trouble-ahead
http://www.inquisitr.com/55109/australian-government-to-delay-internet-censorship-until-after-next-election/
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2521164.htm

Common sense Aussies should be outraged by the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s (ACMA) heavy handed ultimatum that’s forcing Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) to remove a link to an abortion site from their blog.

A deletion notice was issued to the EFA stating that if they did not to remove the respective link by 6pm on the following business day they would face $11,000 in fines per day as a consequence. The ACMA ruled that the content on the website was R18+ prohibited content.

A representative of the EFA ‘Colin Jacobs’ said that Australians should be alarmed at this action considering the principles involved. He stated that the link is part of a political discussion about the merits of Internet censorship and that there was never any suggestion that the Australian Government would seek to block political content.

This action by the ACMA is sure to raise concern and argumentation over the legitimacy of what should be, and shouldn’t be classed as inappropriate content, especially if it has any political agenda.

Initial indications from many Optus customers suggest that they’re far from happy with the Optus decision to rejoin the Federal Government’s controversial Internet Content Filtering trial.

Broadband Industry analyst Paul Budde has also expressed his concern with the Content Filtering retort by Optus and stated that he suspects many Optus customers will be angered by such a decision.

“I thought the credibility of the whole situation was now so low that very few companies would actually put their weight behind it. It is clear the customers of companies such as Optus will not be amused about this sort of activity. So in that respect I am a bit surprised that companies do stick their neck out in a situation like that.” – Paul Budde

Not only does Mr Budde suggest that many Optus customers will be irate by the decision, he also ridiculed the Government’s process as unacceptable for a democratic society, which is also a view that has been aired by a significant amount of the online informed.

The Federal Government push to have mandatory content filtering introduced has appeared very ‘strong handed’, and capitalising further on Mr budde’s views, I too, am concerned with what might become, if such a potential precedent is struck.