Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Is Conroy backing down or just trying a new approach. the Minister has described the MISP as a 'modest measure today', in an effort to make it sound like a perfectly normal - or uncontroversial - thing to do...

Listen to Radio National- Australia Talks. Presenter Paul Barclay mediates a discussion about the proposed mandatory internet filtering system. He talks with Minister Stephen Conroy and Colin Jacobs, Vice President of Electronic Frontiers Australia. Together with two experts, Mark Newton a network engineer and Andrew Graydon Chief Operations Office of Netsweeper, who both provide technical analysis on the efficiency of the filtering system.

Stephen Conroy responds to the 'myths' about ISP filtering on the Punch

The spat continues between Google and Stephen Conroy with their arguments looking to be ongoing ad infinitum in a bid to get back at the other. Although the Greens also pipe up with saying Conroy looks as though his vehement criticisms of Google do appear to be consequence to their outspoken criticisms of the mandatory filter.

Media hyperbole or a serious threat? Threatening posts on the '4chan' boards has the government ad the SMH worried...

Although in some respects, the public response to Australia's push to impose mandatory internet filtering, there has been a violent and disturbing response from a select group calling for the assassination of Stephen Conroy and advising on how to make bombs.

How on earth can he guarantee that this will be 100 percent accurate - with no overblocking, and no underblocking!?!?! And in this interview, he advises that this is not a limit on freedom of speech and that the internet should not be considered a special platform.

This article discusses how the Australian Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has dismissed the Internet as a special medium, claiming that it is nothing more than, "just a communication distrbution platform." Which, is quite short sighted, as the notion of open source, crowd sourcing, collective/collecting intelligence, collaborative intelligence is achievable because of the Internet. Conroy also claims that his filter is 100 percent accurate..." which begs to question, according to who? Filtering, content only prevents access, it does not prevent those individuals from crimnimal acts offline, nor does it address how to protect victims from their predators.

Aust slammed by Google and US State Dept - they're the only ones allowed to filter (for agreed public good while maintaining fiction of unconstrained freedom).

Minister Stephen Conroy challenges Google's credibility in response to the search engine giant's criticism of Australia's looming mandatory filtering. Interestingly he also says he is unaware of complaints from Hilary Clinton - which his department responded to in the previous article I posted. Interesting...

Hilary Clinton, Secretary of State for the US has 'raised concerns' with Australian officials as part of the ongoing relationship between the countries on the plan to implement mandatory filtering. If the government succeeds, Australia will join the likes of Saudi Arabia, Burma, China, North Korea, Egypt, Iran and other countries often less than co-operative in foreign affairs.

Even Piers Ackerman thinks the Government's proposed ISP filtering is a bad idea! Possibly the first time I've ever been on the same side of a debate as Ackerman, makes me feel a little nauseous. Granted, this is really just another avenue of Rudd/Labor bashing for him, but it shows that there are people on both sides of the political divide who oppose internet censorship.

Follow up article to Ambassador Bleich's appearance on Q&A last night, where he said the "internet has to be free" and that there were other means of combating nasty content such as child pornography. "We have been able to accomplish the goals that Australia has described, which is to capture and prosecute child pornographers ... without having to use internet filters" Surely a strong American stance against the MISP means no MISP?

Following the government's decision to postpone the internet filtering legislation last week what is the future for this legislation? Post election there is the likelihood of even harsher censorship than that currently proposed. Fitzgerald suggests that the election could be turned in part in to a referendum on the issue? But when it comes down to it which party will actually nominate themselves to lead the charge against the filter in parliament- only the Sex Party??- a party founded on the issue of internet censorship.

This article discusses how a private Labor party polling has indicated that some computer-illterate mums and dads wish to have Conroy make the Internet safer for their children.

According to Stephen Conroy, there is nothing that can be done to stop the passing of the legislation implementing mandatory internet filtering. He stands by all the statements he has previously made, and advises this IS occurring in June.

This article is about Stephen Conroy's push for the Internet filtering regardlessof the scrutiny it has undergone over the past months. The government will force ISPs to block a series of websites that have been secretly identified as refused classification.

my own

The Government's plan for censorship would allegedly mean the majority of the population wouldn't be able to access this game. But those who were tech-savvy enough, and wanted to enough would be able to.

Founder of the infamous Australian Whirlpool Forums Simon Hackett outlines five points about the impending government ISP level filter. Interesting as it highlights the gap between the governments ideals for online family security and the realpolitik for control.

surprise surprise, the MISP is off the agenda till after the election...

"we are not amused".....i don't think this can be resurrected...unless there's a huge public outcry about something and they wheel it back in.

how much time and money has been wasted on these initiatives that get shelved?

This offers an overview of how the debate over the proposed mandatory internet filtering law has played out to date. In particular it outlines key voices in the debate and their stance.

EFA look at the answers provided Senator Conroy's office to the Questions on Notice asked by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam. EFA's summary is accompanied with their comment to each of the Ministry's responses but at the end you are able download the entire exchange.

A step back- looking at censorship in Australia under the Rudd government. Going back to when the ISP filtering laws were first proposed David Marr observes an underlining level of conservatism in Australia in particular light of the governments pursuit of censorship. He looks at the governments approach to undesired content on the internet by reflecting back on the Bill Henson case.