Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Liberals against the internet filter

By johnboy - 6 August 2010 40

Readers wrestling with their eventual decision on which major party to place last on the ballot will be interested to learn in The Age that the Liberals are now committed to dumping plans for a mandatory internet filter.

(For those wondering, yes it’s not a Canberra story, but it does go to the continued existence of websites like ours that could fall foul of capricious decision making if a filtering mechanism came into being).

Labor's proposed internet filter

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
40 Responses to
Liberals against the internet filter
planeguy 6:02 pm 06 Aug 10

I’m not too concerned by what Labor would block in 2010-2013. I am very concerned that if labor requires all ISPs to implement the technology, then what happens if Family First or One Nation or Greens or whomever gets into power in future years decides to block information or political thought.

That is why the filter is different to normal classification/censorship – the filter blocks a type of communication, and then let’s bits through. Too much central control gives too much power to be abused.

Outta Control 5:29 pm 06 Aug 10

Interesting that Joe Hockey posted on Facebook this morning that the Libs would scrap the Internet filter. Within a few minutes 6 people Liked the post and there were five congratulatory messages. Less than ten minutes later Hockey removed the post. I’m just hoping that there is nothing sinister in this – ie: that the Libs have been “got at” by the Christian lobby and that they won’t scrap the filter after all.

moneypenny2612 5:08 pm 06 Aug 10

johnboy said :

Under what criteria was the brisbane dentist banned NickD?

IIRC the URL was either blacklisted by mistake or because the site had been hacked by Russian child porn purveyors. I think the regulator ACMA issued a press release about it.

The current criteria used by ACMA are based on the classification scheme used for films and books. It is my understanding that the ALP mandatory filter proposes to use the same criteria – which is crap because the classification scheme has not been updated for donkeys years and does not cater well for the internet age.

The RiotACT would really only be at risk if posts incite or provide instructions about crime (one element of the current RC classification). It’s that element that causes grief for the euthanasia activists and the like (because suicide or assisting suicide is still technically a crime in most Australian jurisdictions). Ditto abortion.

Still, the Liberal policy is to promote ‘free’ PC filters – I’d rather my taxpayer dollars were spent on something other than fully subsidising the supply of Net Nanny’s filter into Australian homes. So the Libs have not won my vote.

If concerned citizens want to protect their children from web nasties they can buy their own filters just like I’d hope they’d buy their child a crash helmet for when they ride a bike. Parental responsibility and all that jazz.

hax 5:05 pm 06 Aug 10

cmdwedge said :

Excellent news from the Libs. The filter is just the thin edge of the wedge.


Thoroughly Smashed 4:48 pm 06 Aug 10

Less likely to vote ALP sure, but no more likely to vote LIB.

harley 4:38 pm 06 Aug 10

Where is the “this is the only decent policy the libs have” option?

I’m against the filter 99%, but I’m 100% against the libs. I’m happy to bypass the filter if required.

LG 4:30 pm 06 Aug 10

That’s part of the issue. Labor doesn’t want you to know what is banned, or why.

Stupid, useless policy. People shouldn’t be fooled by Labor’s attempt to hide the policy by announcing a review.

frontrow 4:28 pm 06 Aug 10

Will I still be able to follow Scunthorpe United?

Hells_Bells74 4:14 pm 06 Aug 10

It doesn’t take much to convince me against Labor these days.

georgesgenitals 4:07 pm 06 Aug 10

You don’t like the Libs much, do you JB…

Woody Mann-Caruso 4:06 pm 06 Aug 10

Or that nefarious school canteen supplier! Just think of all the children they could’ve molested with Paddlepops.

watto23 4:02 pm 06 Aug 10

Whether you voted labour or liberal didn’t matter. As long as there was enough people of the right parties to block the bill in the senate was all that mattered.

We are assured of that now, just make sure you vote for different parties for the house of reps and the senate.

Really the libs don’t disagree with filtering, just the technology that was being used.

johnboy 3:59 pm 06 Aug 10

Under what criteria was the brisbane dentist banned NickD?

NickD 3:57 pm 06 Aug 10

Under what criteria would this site be banned exactly?

While I think that the internet filter is an awful policy, there’s no need to be alarmist about it.

cmdwedge 3:50 pm 06 Aug 10

Excellent news from the Libs. The filter is just the thin edge of the wedge.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site