Slashdot Mirror


Australian Labor Party Proposes ISP Level Filter

An anonymous reader writes "The Australian Labor Party (much the same as the Democrats in the US) are claiming they will force ISPs to block violent and pornographic content if elected. From the article: 'Mr Beazley said all households would be included in the policy unless there was a specific request for access to such material. It was "too hard" for many parents to install internet blockers on their computers to prevent offensive material being downloaded.'"

10 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. What? by guardian653 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just who defines "violent" or "pornographic" material? What is "violent" or "pornographic" material? Frankly, people who are smart will eventually get around it anyway...

    1. Re:What? by SoloFlyer2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Im an australian and i am Outraged... I dont want to have to try and get around filters like this, i dont want to have to apply for filters to be removed from my internet connection This is australia THIS IS NOT FUCKING CHINA!

      "almost two-thirds of parents don't have internet filters on their family computers," Mr Beazley said. did he stop to think that maybe two-thirds decided that they didnt want their internet access restricted or were already filtering their connection using a method which wasnt included in their "statistics".

      The current opt-in system works well and should be LEFT ALONE!

      "research suggests that the exposure of children and others in the community to this sickening content can lead to aggression towards women and child abuse."

      In fact a quick google returns many opposing views eg

      "Research by Goldstein et al. shows that sex offenders generally had less contact with erotica in their formative years than did non-offenders and typically had a sexually repressed childhood and sexually repressive parents"

      Anyway, Im very upset to even read this and [Insert insults and offensive comment directed at Kim Beazley Here].

      --
      "I reject your reality, and substitute my own" - Adam Savage
  2. Filtering software is too hard to install? by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cry me a fucking river.

    Can't install filtering software? How about sitting down with your kids and keeping an eye on what they're doing instead? Move the PC out to a communal area - the front room or dining room, somewhere you can see it from. Hell, you could even end up taking an actual interest in what they're doing, discussing things with them and perhaps even taking a part in their education (dangerous, I know). You never know, they might even learn a few limits of their own.

    God forbid that parents should have to take some personal responsibility for what their children are exposed to. I know parenting isn't easy, but this trend of shoving responsibility and effort off to third parties is sickening.

  3. It won't happen by GrahamCox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The ALP is currently in unelectable self-destruct mode, and appears to show no real signs of getting that fixed before the next election. Which is unfortunate, as the incumbents are a bunch of equally obnoxious nazis, though for other reasons. I doubt that having such nanny-state type policies is likely to help them in any way. What I can't figure out is why they don't just hand over the leadership to Julia Gillard and start working towards making themselves actually attractive to voters. None of this stuff is relevant to that goal, or will help them in any way shape or form. And I speak as a parent.

  4. In other news... by SysKoll · · Score: 5, Funny

    A study just released by the Labor Party shows that 99.9% of the other parties's web site are considered violent, pornographic or both. "So if we block them after we are elected, it won't be censorship, it will be because we need to protect those poor, hapless households", says Mr Weazley, head of the Internet Content Tagging Office at the Labor Party HQ.

    --

    --
    Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/

  5. Re:Australia seems to be more repressive than US by fabs64 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's more of a "the government says this" and the public says "yeah try and enforce it" kind of thing really.
    The two major governments are reasonably conservative (although an analogy of the labor party to the democrats is just plain farsical) and so we get crap like this proposed.

    Also, puritanical implies religious, Australia is very secular, and this is more a case of "working class mums and dads don't want their kids looking up porn".

    That said, this is a completely ludicrious proposal by the labor party and needless to say they've lost my vote for the next federal election.

  6. And again... by OverflowingBitBucket · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Welcome to Australian politics, everyone. *rolls eyes*

    For those not familiar with Australian politics, let me help out a little. In Australia, we have a healthy disrespect for our politicos. Your average Australian will happily diss both major parties, even if they actually voted them in. Occasionally, one of our politicos will say something that is so out there, so backwards, so poorly thought-out that it causes many of us to hang or heads in shame.

    And when it comes to IT, our politicos are famous for coming up with poorly thought-out schemes that can make people from even the most backwater of country towns sadly shake their heads, thinking "luddites". So please, don't judge us based on our "representatives". Please look at us as the designated driver who is ashamed of their drunken friend who is making a fool out of himself but still needs someone to drive them home at the end of the evening. This is a shameless attempt at grabbing support from the "think of the children" voter demographic by a party that has been getting spanked in the federal elections for many years by a party that isn't that much better. Hopefully this attempt (not the first) will die the death it deserves and we won't have to hear about it again. Fear not, there isn't any significant grassroots desire for this sort of censorship. Not that I know about anyway! I'd say that the bulk of informed people find the whole proposal to be ridiculous.

  7. Re:Porn defined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's no way to talk about my wife

  8. Meanwhile, in Italy... by grand_it · · Score: 5, Informative
    ..Judges are requiring ISPs to restict certain websites by filtering their IP addresses. Child porn, of course, but also sites that aren't doing anything illegal in their place of activity, such as:

    - chinese Web-TVs that stream sport events whose broadcasting rights in Italy are owned by satellite operator SKY;
    - Gambling/sport betting/online casinos, that are required to pay a royalty/tax to operate in Italy;

    The worst part of the deal is that no formal trial is done before the order is given to ISPs, so websites don't have any chance to defend their rights. Oh, and citizens don't have the right to know the full list of restricted websites.

  9. Re:Porn defined by toad3k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Porn is anything you lose interest in after you cum

    I don't think the isp has enough employees to implement that kind of filter.