FHM

Internet filter
Share |

See no evil

{ Date Posted:
May-11-2010 15:14
Comments: 119 }

Australia may soon face internet censorship laws similar to those applied in communist China, as Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, pushes for a mandatory Internet Service Provider (ISP) filtering of the web.

Let’s leave aside the argument about whether the filter will actually work (many experts think it won’t), the question that needs to be answered is whether we support the idea in the first place. We’d say that given the filter is being introduced, ostensibly, to block extreme pornography sites, it’s pretty hard not to support it. 

Let’s just be clear: we’re not talking about your bookmarked soft-porn here. We’re talking about extremely unpleasant stuff like child porn and bestiality, footage of severe real-life violence, or any detailed instructions in crime, violence or terrorism. These kinds of materials are by and large illegal anyway – it seems only logical to try to find a way to prevent them being disseminated via the web, straight into the bedrooms of kids. 

But what concerns internet censorship dissidents is that the government’s argument that they’re acting in our best interests could also be used to block a wide range of topics that grown men and women should have access to. Internet forums that discuss issues like euthanasia, abortion, racism and even sensitive political material can be refused classification and may fall onto the secretive “blacklist” of banned sites. 

The question you need to answer in your own mind is this: does the protection of children trump your right to make your own decisions about what you can and can not view on the internet? If you trust the government not to abuse its power, you might say yes. But if you’re uncomfortable giving that kind of decision-making authority to Canberra bureaucrats, you’ll probably think otherwise. 

What do you think? If you agree with the filter, what websites should or should not be blacklisted?     

 Related links:
Airbrushing: not the root of all evil
'90s movie remakes we'd like to see
Justin Bieber: homeless smackhead?

Comments (119)

show all
  • I'm in two minds... it's positive to ban illegal content however, it could also ban important issues as pointed ou here. I also like the freedom we have now. Been to China and and as there was only one English channel, I sourced the web to stream one of my favourite show to p*** the time. Some sites were blocked therefore doubling the search for the same content. I will welcome it as long as it doesn't go into overdrive.
    Report this »
  • I'm in two minds... it's positive to ban illegal content however, it could also ban important issues as pointed ou here. I also like the freedom we have now. Been to China and and as there was only one English channel, I sourced the web to stream one of my favourite show to p*** the time. Some sites were blocked therefore doubling the search for the same content. I will welcome it as long as it doesn't go into overdrive.
    Report this »
  • Its positive to try to ban illegal content but everyone knows that people will find away to put it online internet filter on not, my question is do we as a nation deserve to have our one medium for free speech taken away I really dont think its going to work thats why its call a world wide web its world wide and this content is not on australian servers,
    Report this »
  • The reality is not about safety et al., but rather, it is an attempt to seize and execute power over others. If a single human or body of people are to have control over and determine what others do see think etc then I in turn can access and or determine what others can or cannot do. My advise to millions of others is that, if and when another takes control of the internet to the detriment of its users, then all you need to do is stop using the internet, afterall it is not the be all to human existence.
    Report this »
  • Terrible Idea. The moment we start limiting our freedoms is the moment we start heading down the road to destruction. This is a decision to sacrifice freedom for "safety" - which simply wont exist. The world is a bad place, we know that but we don't stop going outside. We're not told where we may and may-not go, we know where we should and shouldn't go. Those that break the law, will always find a way to do so. It may just make the promblem worse.
    Report this »
  1. Previous
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. Next

Add Comment

You must be a member to comment. You can login here, or register here.

FHM Galleries

  • Most Popular

    view all
  • Most Recent

    view all

Poll