Australia placed on censorship watch list

**Mid** · 12-03-2010, 07:55 AM

Australia placed on censorship watch list
Suzanne Tindal
12 March 2010

A media rights watchdog has listed Australia in a report on countries that pose a threat of internet censorship.

Paris-based media rights group Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on Thursday put Australia and South Korea on its list of countries "under surveillance" in its "Internet Enemies" report.

Australia was listed for its government's plan to block access to websites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.

Critics say the plan is a misguided measure that will harm civil liberties.

In South Korea, the RSF report added, "draconian laws are creating too many specific restrictions on web users by challenging their anonymity and promoting self-censorship".

"These countries are worrying us because they have measures that could have repercussions for freedom of expression on the internet," RSF secretary general Jean-Francois Julliard said at an internet rights award ceremony on Thursday.

Russia and Turkey were also added to the watchlist, which comprised of Australia, Bahrain, Belarus, Eritrea, Malaysia, Russia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates.

The list is a category below RSF's top "Enemies of the internet", the countries it considered the 12 worst web freedom violators. These were China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

"The world's largest netizen prison is in China, which is far out ahead of other countries with 72 detainees, followed by Vietnam and then by Iran, which have all launched waves of brutal attacks on websites in recent months," RSF's report said.

A senior manager of US internet giant Google, David Drummond, said there was an "alarming trend" of government interference in online freedom, not only in countries that are judged to have poor human rights records.

He cited Australia's plans as an example, saying that "the wide scope of content prohibited could include socially and politically controversial material".

The Australian case "is an example of where these benign intentions can result in the spectre of true censorship", he added, speaking at Thursday's ceremony.

"Here in Europe, even in France, at this very moment, some are tempted by this slippery path of network filtering."

David Vaile, executive director of the University of New South Wales Cyberspace and Law Policy centre said that an outside observer might be concerned that the scope of the filter seemed broader than in other nations, as touched on by Drummond.

The observer might also have concerns about how the debate on the filter was being conducted, according to Vaile, because the government has failed to acknowledge that the filter was a form of censorship, when it was.

zdnet.com.au

**panama hat** · 12-03-2010, 08:41 AM

Quite disappointing that the Oz government has taken these steps

**peter000** · 12-03-2010, 12:41 PM

The Rudd government has been waffling on about this plan for well over a year. It has yet to happen and given the groundswell I doubt that it will. An online poll on the Sydney Morning Herald site (taken 15/12/09) shows 96% of respondents feel that it is an infringement on their freedom.

It is bad policy and a stupid political move in an election year. Imagine the backlash from Gen Y!

**good2bhappy** · 12-03-2010, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by Mid

Australia was listed for its government's plan to block access to websites featuring material such as rape, drug use, bestiality and child sex abuse.

I think they should be applauded not condemned
only perverts would want to access such material
As usual the french are misguided

**Mid** · 12-03-2010, 01:07 PM

But about half of the sites on the list are not related to child porn and include a slew of online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

Leaked Australian blacklist reveals banned sites - Technology - smh.com.au

**panama hat** · 12-03-2010, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by good2bhappy

I think they should be applauded not condemned
only perverts would want to access such material
As usual the french are misguided

If it were the case then yes . . but:

Originally Posted by Mid

But about half of the sites on the list are not related to child porn and include a slew of online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

**peter000** · 12-03-2010, 02:50 PM

Won't happen....

**corvettelover** · 12-03-2010, 02:58 PM

generation Y and younger need to be supervised with what they access, as they seem to know it all anyway but a 8 year old child needs a child hood not a 30 year old head on his shoulders.
When adults talked amomgst them selves kids were told to go away and play.
but the wonderful parents of today let them sit and listen to adult conservations.
any wonder they think they are grown up and no it all at 14.
worst part is they will be breeding shortly so what chance do their kids going to have.
I agree with the ban and i am aussie

**nevets** · 12-03-2010, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by panama hat

Originally Posted by good2bhappy

I think they should be applauded not condemned
only perverts would want to access such material
As usual the french are misguided

If it were the case then yes . . but:

Originally Posted by Mid

But about half of the sites on the list are not related to child porn and include a slew of online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

Yes a good idea if it is to be for the right reasons , but as we see here it will get abused and other things they do not like will be in the net.

**peter000** · 12-03-2010, 03:36 PM

It's the parents responsibility to supervise their children, including internet access and the like and in general if they do this then the child matures into a reasonable type of adult. This is not part of a government's role, never can be, never should be.... the consequences of governmental meddling in such private affairs could be catastrophic e.g. nobody in OZ with internet access to Teak Door?

This government could not roll-out a relatively uncomplicated home insulation scheme, so how will they fare with this particular "initiative" (Ruddy loves this word!)

**corvettelover** · 12-03-2010, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by peter000

It's the parents responsibility to supervise their children, including internet access and the like and in general if they do this then the child matures into a reasonable type of adult. This is not part of a government's role, never can be, never should be.... the consequences of governmental meddling in such private affairs could be catastrophic e.g. nobody in OZ with internet access to Teak Door?

This government could not roll-out a relatively uncomplicated home insulation scheme, so how will they fare with this particular "initiative" (Ruddy loves this word!)

"Its the parents responsibility to supervise their children"

So how do you supervise a child now days and advise them,

Most dont listen, and they are bullet proof cant be punished against the law to punish a child go to jail for that

and agree about the home insulation scheme, mines already done thanks kevin

**peter000** · 12-03-2010, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by corvettelover

Originally Posted by peter000

It's the parents responsibility to supervise their children, including internet access and the like and in general if they do this then the child matures into a reasonable type of adult. This is not part of a government's role, never can be, never should be.... the consequences of governmental meddling in such private affairs could be catastrophic e.g. nobody in OZ with internet access to Teak Door?

This government could not roll-out a relatively uncomplicated home insulation scheme, so how will they fare with this particular "initiative" (Ruddy loves this word!)

"Its the parents responsibility to supervise their children"

So how do you supervise a child now days and advise them,

Most dont listen, and they are bullet proof cant be punished against the law to punish a child go to jail for that

and agree about the home insulation scheme, mines already done thanks kevin

Any parent knows deep down that his kids are not bullet-proof (bugger the law if gentle discipline is required, as a last resort). If you cannot provide direct supervision then you can at least lead by example, or at least put your kids under the watchful eye of decent teachers, or whatever. Nothing special about nowadays, as far as I can see. Children listen (in the end) to well-guided advice and they respond to good examples.

My insulation is not done, thanks for zilch, FU to Peter Garrett and Kevvy.

**dirtydog** · 12-03-2010, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by Mid

Australia was listed for its government's plan to block access to websites featuring material such as drug use and bestiality.

How will the younger Aussie generation learn to be like their parents without access to information like this...

**Spin** · 12-03-2010, 10:27 PM

^ Those skills are taught in the home by the parents, no need for the internet

**blackgang** · 13-03-2010, 04:59 AM

Originally Posted by Mid

Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

Just how many people want to see some guy sticking his tools in someone's mouth?

Thaiguy · 13-03-2010, 06:48 AM

Originally Posted by peter000

Won't happen....

Captain Crudd ( and Tony Blabbit ) are both so desparate for a clean image they will do anything to entice even the God Botherers to vote for them .
Not to worry , they are both hypocritical liars and will switch their promises once elected.
Australia does not have a leader of any integrity at the moment - for the first time ever I will vote informal much as I hate a wasted vote.

Thaiguy · 13-03-2010, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by corvettelover

generation Y and younger need to be supervised with what they access, as they seem to know it all anyway but a 8 year old child needs a child hood not a 30 year old head on his shoulders.
When adults talked amomgst them selves kids were told to go away and play.
but the wonderful parents of today let them sit and listen to adult conservations.
any wonder they think they are grown up and no it all at 14.
worst part is they will be breeding shortly so what chance do their kids going to have.
I agree with the ban and i am aussie

I disagree with you in that pornography can be very educational for imagination starved males and frustrated wives .
Also if you drive anything underground it becomes even more attractive and more likely to be controlled by criminals ( think back a bit if your old enough).
My apprenticeship as a gravure operator ( photographic colour separation for printed reproduction) led to me being hired at an early age to shoot stills for porn movie packaging material . I was 18 at the time , never raped anyone as a result and learnt a lot at an early age about how to satisfy a woman , ( very popular with subsequent GF's).

**panama hat** · 13-03-2010, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by peter000

It's the parents responsibility to supervise their children,

Of course it is, when did this reliance on the government start in this instance?

Originally Posted by peter000

This is not part of a government's role, never can be, never should be.

Ditto ditto ditto

Originally Posted by peter000

the consequences of governmental meddling in such private affairs could be catastrophic e.g. nobody in OZ with internet access to Teak Door?

The only voices of reason left would be Aussies living abroad

Originally Posted by peter000

Ruddy loves this word!)

He's a disgrace . . . rather have Howard back

Originally Posted by corvettelover

So how do you supervise a child now days and advise them,

The same as it has always been done. We have children and we manage, why shouldn't others?

Originally Posted by Thaiguy

Australia does not have a leader of any integrity at the moment

Indeed not . . . the current bunch are a disgrace

**Norton** · 15-03-2010, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by peter000

Won't happen....

Hope not. Once the "government" starts censoring anything it will be abused.

If a parent is worried about kids access to certain internet sites, then make sure the browser won't let them access these type of sites. Chat rooms are probably more dangerous to kids than specific web sites. Best to educate them on how to spot some wanker pedophile posing as 12 year old on some chat room for adolescents.

**slackula** · 17-03-2010, 09:19 AM

My understanding is that Encyclopedia Dramatica is going to be on the list, mainly because of its page on Aborigines.

Somebody needs to explain it's satire, Encyclopedia Dramatica is offensive to everyone, that is the point of it.

Warning: Link is extremely non PC and not for those of a sensitive disposition!
Aboriginal - Encyclopedia Dramatica

**panama hat** · 17-03-2010, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by slackula

My understanding is that Encyclopedia Dramatica is going to be on the list, mainly because of its page on Aborigines.

They're way ahead of you, slackula:

Sickipedia: bid to shut offensive 'encyclopedia dramatica'

ASHER MOSES
March 17, 2010 - 12:41PM

The Australian Human Rights Commission has threatened legal action against a widely read but controversial US-based website over an article that encourages racial hatred against Aborigines.

But online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia said that trying to stamp out the deplorable content would only create the "Streisand" effect, whereby an attempt to censor online content only brings more attention to it.

In a letter to Joseph Evers, the owner of Encyclopedia Dramatica (ED) - a more shocking version of Wikipedia that contains racist and other offensive articles dubbed as "satire" - the commission said it had received 20 complaints from Aborigines over the "Aboriginal" page on the site.

The same page was in the news in January when, in a rare move, Google Australia agreed to remove links to the article from its search engine following legal action from Aboriginal man Steve Hodder-Watt.

On the Australian Communication and Media Authority's blacklist of "refused classification" websites, which was leaked in March last year, encyclopediadramatica.com was included. This means the entire site will most likely be blocked under the government's forthcoming internet filtering plan.

The commission argued in its letter, the first page of which was published by Evers on his website, that the article on Aborigines constituted racial hatred and was in breach of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

A disclaimer at the top of the article, which is too vulgar to repeat here, says it was "not racist at all" because it was written by "Australian aborigines who are satirizing racists in Australia in the same way that Sacha Baron Cohen, a jew, uses the character Borat to satirize anti-semetism [sic]".

A separate article on the site about Australia says the country is "comprised entirely of the still imprisoned distant relatives of Britain's worst criminals (tax dodging sheep f*****) and other detritus and a haven for aspiring international terrorists".

The page is illustrated with a picture of Josef Fritzl draped in an Australian flag. Fritzl was sentenced to life in prison for raping his daughter and for imprisoning her and their children over a 24-year period.

Evers had argued in an email to the commission that, because his site was hosted in the US, it was covered by the country's free speech regulations and not subject to Australian laws.

In response to this, the commission pointed to an internet defamation case heard in the High Court of Australia in 2002, in which US publisher Dow Jones was found to have defamed an Australian resident, Joseph Gutnick, in an article on Barron's Online.

The highly controversial case was settled in 2004 with Dow Jones agreeing to pay Gutnick close to $600,000 in damages.

"In this case an article on a website available from a server in the USA was held to have been published in Australia where the article was available for viewing and where the readers downloaded the story," the commission said in its letter.

"In light of this decision, it appears that the RDA [Racial Discrimination Act] is applicable to this matter."

In a blog post, prefaced with claims that Encyclopedia Dramatica was "a labor of love" and with tips for readers to "eat a few grams of highly potent mushrooms" in Chichen Itza in Mexico, Evers said he feared legal action would be brought by the commission against him personally.

"While I act in complete compliance with both the civil and criminal codes of the United States of America, and am assured the right of free speech according to our Constitution ... I can personally be jailed and fined for the violation of this law," Evers wrote.

"Encyclopedia Dramatica will never be censored in any way. We will keep publishing this content and our Australian users will be able to view it up until the point that your God-forsaken government blocks it with their soon-to-be-implemented secret list of banned material."

Evers said his lawyers had advised him never to visit his family in Sydney again or to set foot on Australian soil.

The commission refused to comment.

Colin Jacobs, spokesman for Electronic Frontiers Australia, said the article was "indefensible" but questioned whether Australian law could be used to take it down.

He said the Dow Jones v Gutnick case was different because it was a civil rather than a criminal matter and Dow Jones had paying subscribers in Australia, so was found to be publishing here.

"EFA doesn't believe that because something is on the internet it should be immune from critical examination or legal redress. Defamation and anti-hate-speech laws have a place even when applied to online content," Jacobs said.

"[But] a costly and lengthy legal battle would only give these guys more publicity, and the day the case was won, the page would pop up on a web host in another country. Trying to stamp out this fire will just cause it to spread."

Jacobs referred to the Streisand effect, named after Barbra Streisand's unsuccessful attempt to sue a photographer for $US50 million in an effort to have an aerial photograph of her mansion removed from a photo collection.

Once word of the legal action leaked out, the image spread like wildfire on the internet and hundreds of thousands more people ended up seeing it than had originally been the case.

Sickipedia: bid to shut offensive 'encyclopedia dramatica'

**slackula** · 17-03-2010, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by panama hat

They're way ahead of you, slackula:

If they block it it'll just mean that it does the rounds as an email attachment forever and gets more attention than it normally would have.

**panama hat** · 17-03-2010, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by slackula

Originally Posted by panama hat

They're way ahead of you, slackula:

If they block it it'll just mean that it does the rounds as an email attachment forever and gets more attention than it normally would have.

But the boffins just don't understand that.

Here's the link to the Aboriginal entry . . . it is gross, racist, at times funny and very offensive . . . but to ban the whole site for this?

Aboriginal - Encyclopedia Dramatica

Oh, I'd never heard of this encyc dramat. before . . . and would never google this shit . . . but thanks to the Australian government millions more will click on this page and give the author a hard-on.

Australian politicans and Quangos . . . working for the dole

**slackula** · 17-03-2010, 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by panama hat

Oh, I'd never heard of this encyc dramat. before . . . and would never google this shit . . . but thanks to the Australian government millions more will click on this page

Yup, which is why I believe internet censorship will never work.

Originally Posted by panama hat

But the boffins just don't understand that.

It's not boffins making these decisions, it's always vote-grabbing politicians.

Originally Posted by panama hat

but thanks to the Australian government millions more will click on this page and give the author a hard-on.

The owner of the site is a cool guy, he's not looking for attention, he just likes taking the piss out of everything. That is the whole point of ED.

Thread: Australia placed on censorship watch list

Thread Tools

Display

Australia placed on censorship watch list

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions