Skip to main content

Home/ New Media Ethics 2009 course/ Australia's porn-blocking plan unveiled
Elaine Ong

Australia's porn-blocking plan unveiled - 10 views

started by Elaine Ong on 31 Aug 09
  • Elaine Ong
    #1 Elaine Ong on 31 Aug 09
     
    http://news.cnet.com/2100-7348_3-6202226.html

    This is about Australia putting measures in place which will help curb online pornography, which includes "Web police", ISP-level filters and even awareness campaigns for parents and caretakers. But there were lots of mentioning about child pornography and the responsibility of parents.

    To what extent should the ends be allowed to justify the means? It feels like the government is just representing the Christian majority, and by the way, I am sure Christians themselves watch porn too. What are the standards put in place to determine whether something is of adult content? Who set those standards? Based on 'general' beliefs and what the government/"web police'' think is best for the public?

    I feel that these measures actually just curtail freedom of expression and the public have the rights to gain access to information. Would we be happier if the government decides what we should look at online? How does it differ from framing in a movie? Censoring/filtering out something may be a way of reinforcing the government's standpoint and their views of what is 'bad' and should be kept out of view.

    But then again, censoring may not necessarily be a good cause of action. For example, censored vulgarities in songs are so easily deciphered. Also, what is offensive to some people, may be normal to others! What gives the government the right to determine what is acceptable or not? What's more, the public today do consist of concerted oppositions who are pro-porn, and they will still find ways to upload/view porn. For example would be the use of the word 'PRON' instead of PORN which is censored on certain digital platforms.

    This is a funny short article spoofing porn being banned in Australia..
    -- > http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1007082/wi-porn-banned-planes
  • juliet huang
    #2 juliet huang on 01 Sep 09
     
    I guess this is why some people argue that values may not necessarily be universal enough to set ethical guidelines.
    Elaine Ong wrote:
    > http://news.cnet.com/2100-7348_3-6202226.html
    >
    > This is about Australia putting measures in place which will help curb online pornography, which includes "Web police", ISP-level filters and even awareness campaigns for parents and caretakers. But there were lots of mentioning about child pornography and the responsibility of parents.
    >
    > To what extent should the ends be allowed to justify the means? It feels like the government is just representing the Christian majority, and by the way, I am sure Christians themselves watch porn too. What are the standards put in place to determine whether something is of adult content? Who set those standards? Based on 'general' beliefs and what the government/"web police'' think is best for the public?
    >
    > I feel that these measures actually just curtail freedom of expression and the public have the rights to gain access to information. Would we be happier if the government decides what we should look at online? How does it differ from framing in a movie? Censoring/filtering out something may be a way of reinforcing the government's standpoint and their views of what is 'bad' and should be kept out of view.
    >
    > But then again, censoring may not necessarily be a good cause of action. For example, censored vulgarities in songs are so easily deciphered. Also, what is offensive to some people, may be normal to others! What gives the government the right to determine what is acceptable or not? What's more, the public today do consist of concerted oppositions who are pro-porn, and they will still find ways to upload/view porn. For example would be the use of the word 'PRON' instead of PORN which is censored on certain digital platforms.
    >
    > This is a funny short article spoofing porn being banned in Australia..
    > -- > http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1007082/wi-porn-banned-planes
  • Jody Poh
    #3 Jody Poh on 01 Sep 09
     
    Elaine said: What are the standards put in place to determine whether something is of adult content? Who set those standards? Based on 'general' beliefs and what the government/"web police'' think is best for the public?

    My reply:
    I think the article mentioned the importance of protecting children from porn. That is why they need to determine which is of adult content. I think the government is probably acting from the deontological perspective. They feel it is their duty and obligation to protect children of their country.

To Top

Start a New Topic » « Back to the New Media Ethics 2009 course group