Group items tagged

The conversation first looked at internet censorship from an international perspective covering issues of internet governance from and internet freedom. Unfortunately one or two members of the panel were prone to regurgitating policy rather than engaging in an actual debate. Towards the end inevitably the discussion was drawn to the proposed filtering laws within Australia. The general consensus from the panel members was that education had to be an essential part of policy when addressing online safety. Interestingly the government representative, the Minister for Home Affairs, was a keen supporter of this policy stance.

Google in the articulation of a 'foreign policy'??? Could Internet companies develop these kinds of policies?? 

Google's position about internet filtering on China reveals the need for internet companies to develop their own foreign policies. Clay Shirky is interviewed on the topic and he shares his view about how the social effects of internet and how different are the mentalities behind microsoft and google

This article cogently describes the current US govt approach to policy and call for an Internet Policy 3.0. Also clarifies points and describes the issues in regulation and governance that are raised in response.

-US to aim for internet speeds of 100Mbps -Same as the Rudd Government's network -Congress will be asked to provide billions THE US is set to follow Australia in a bid to introduce superfast broadband to millions of homes within the next ten years. A new internet policy to be unveiled this week includes the goal of boosting domestic broadband speeds to 100Mbps - more than 25 times the current average.

During a speech at the Media Institute in Washington [February 24, 2010], Larry Strickling, President Obama's top official at the Department of Commerce and administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), suggested that there should be policy discussions between government agencies, foreign governments and key Internet constituencies on issues such as privacy, child protection, cybersecurity, copyright protection and Internet governance. "It's now time to respond to all the social changes being driven by the growth of the Internet," Strickling said. "We need Internet Policy 3.0. We enter this new decade recognizing that we rely on the Internet for essential social purposes: health, energy efficiency, and education. It's also a general engine for economic and social innovation. We must take rules more seriously if we want full participation, but we must keep the need for flexibility in mind."

It gives you information on government policy and laws regarding Internet censorship in various countries around the world including South Korea and Australia. It is a bit old version, but we can get some ideas how various countires have changed internet censorhip historically.

An article about Internet Censorship Policy.

This is a report, summarizing the main policies and laws about internet censorship of several countries around the world. Including Australia, China, USA, UK, France, etc.

Wow. Read it and weep. Tim O'Reilly is promoting this article. I haven't read anything quite so scarily propagandist since Caberet. What do I mean? (and who is this 'state'?) Courtesy of One Economy Corporation "If e-mail lives in the cloud, who owns that information?" says State Department's Alec Ross. Cloud computing is a double-edged sword in the fight for Internet freedom, a top State Department official said on Wednesday." "During a major policy speech in January, Clinton announced that Internet freedom would become a strategic priority for the United States in 2010. In March, State revived the Global Internet Freedom Task Force, a Bush administration initiative that worked to harmonize policies departmentwide on protecting free speech. The renamed NetFreedom Task Force met on March 4, when 19 telecommunications and information technology companies discussed the corporate sector's role in facilitating Internet freedom."

Internet Policy Task Force is the name of the new initiative the U.S. Commerce Department founded. During the next months it will take a closer look at current policy frameworks and explore ways to address challenges of the new internet economy and society. It will finally advise the White House on how to improve privacy for individuals online. The article mentions current discussions about privacy issues Google and facebook have to face. But obviously these did not directly lead to the kick off of the initiative.

Over the years, Facebook has changed its privacy policy, increasingly restricting  the control that users have of their own privacy.

The news was about Chinese government made effort to justify the censorship policies.

Under sever fire of privacy, Facebook is now tighten their privay policy to ease the fire. The thing is, when it comes to people, it's not that easy to solve. It's no longer a website that JUST allowing users exchage their status and connected to each other, but with more and more apps, people have the feeling that they are being spied on whenever wherever.

Describes how twitter is being used for citizen participation and "democracy" in various countries from Moldova, Iran and now China. The author proposes that the best way to reduce censorship and promote "democracy" is not political pressure, but to "flood the Chinese market, and those of other countries that restrict freedom of expression, with cutting-edge technology". My opinion: Although Twitter seems to be good at allowing citizens to organise and to create consensus, it does not seem to translate well to actual policy outcome. 

Israeli soldier posts the details of an operation on Facebook, and the operation is called off. Ironic: the Internet, originally a military tool, causes trouble in the military. Like with potential victims for kidnapping in Mexico posting personal details online: should basic media literacy education be provided for the use of social media among groups with potential risks?

Article from today's Sydney Morning Herald about the settlement of a lawsuit related to a program called Beacon. I think its important that Facebook is scrutinised regularly, particularly in relation to its quite invasive policies when it comes to collecting data about its users for marketing purposes.

this is a link to the Australian Government's Technology Policy Website.

Two of the three richest men in the world derive their fortunes, in large part, from the information business: Carlos Slim (king of Mexican telecommunications) and Bill Gates (well, we all know what he does). How much power do these two hold over the architecture, policies and whereabouts of the web?  NOTE: the fact that the richest man in the world comes from a country with 80 million poor people is in itself a worthy discussion topic. 

Blog which keeps track of, amongst other issues,ICANN and domain name related topics. A good blog roll as well. 

This article introduces another 'body' called auDA the Australian domain name administrator. The article discusses a complaint from the president of the Australian Web Site Developers Association after 500 sites he had set up, and $100K later were just switched off by the auDA bases on their assessment of use. Perhaps the auDA needs its own audit and regulation over policy approval!

In the words of one infamous US President, Australia - "you are either with us or against us". Australia's proposed mandatory filtering laws runs contrary to stated US foreign policy championing an open internet. Read US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton's remarks on internet freedom.

A conversation between two leading authorities about how governments are using the internet and ICTs to advance their political agendas and policies.