Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aussie Internet Censorship Minister Censors Self

Posted by timothy on from the see-also-recursion dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, the minister attempting to ram the great firewall of Oz down everyone's throat, has been removing all traces of the unpopular legislation from his main website with a JavaScript filter. From the article: 'It was revealed today a script within the minister's homepage deliberately removes references to internet filtering from the list. In the function that creates the list, or "tag cloud," there is a condition that if the words "ISP filtering" appear they should be skipped and not displayed.' Bear in mind, this is the same minister that tried to get the ISP of tech forum Whirlpool to pull the site after users there posted a response email from the ACMA (Australian Communications and Media Authority)."

9 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Elections are coming up... by atomicstrawberry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's federal elections later this year so I imagine the government will be wanting to keep this particular piece of extremely unpopular legislation on the down-low for the rest of the year so that they can do what they did last time and trot it back out after the elections with the statement that they received a mandate from the people to implement it, despite it not actually being a major part of their platform.

    After all, no political party in a supposedly free country would want to start campaigning with something as undemocratic on their books as a secret censorship blacklist run by the government with no judicial oversight and no right of appeal which blocks 'undesireable' content as defined by the government's whim at that particular time of the day. Any competent opposition could make it into a very major issue.

    1. Re:Elections are coming up... by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm trying to figure out why we don't see more of it on the standard bullshit news shows.

      And then I realised where all the funding and authorisation comes from. I just find it... disturbing... that we are all of a sudden getting massive spin coverage on the facebook trolls over death-pages. Again, until I realise that it's the perfect reason to "censor" the internet.

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    2. Re:Elections are coming up... by some_guy_88 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any competent opposition could make it into a very major issue.

      *sigh*..

    3. Re:Elections are coming up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      all of a sudden getting massive spin coverage on the facebook trolls over death-pages.

      The massive spin coverage of Facebook trolls is in the MURDOCH press. Why? Because news corp owns MySpace, the competition. Call me cynical, but it's pretty bloody obvious.

    4. Re:Elections are coming up... by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The liberal party (the opposion in Australia) believe in non-manditory filtering should be available to those who want it, but not manditory.

      It IS TRUE... they are very pro-filtering, despite what their election promise^H lie machine may be trying to spin you.

    5. Re:Elections are coming up... by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      After all, no political party in a supposedly free country would want to start campaigning with something as undemocratic on their books as a secret censorship blacklist run by the government with no judicial oversight and no right of appeal which blocks 'undesireable' content as defined by the government's whim at that particular time of the day. Any competent opposition could make it into a very major issue.

      Quite a few of them have, actually, and managed to paint their opponents as supporters of child porn / terrorism / boogeyman of the day. And many people, even here on Slashdot, have cheered them on, happy to ensure their children won't be exposed to any material they disagree with.

      I figure we're in for a new dark age. With China rising on the outside and politicians, businessmen and hysterical parents on the inside, all those hard-won freedoms and human rights are going to erode away. It won't last forever, of course: given enough time, the pendulum will swing back and humanity will reclaim what it's losing now; but I doubt any of us will see it.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. National Disgrace by Anakie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am so embarrassed to be an Australian right now...

  3. Re:Not helpful by acehole · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm getting tired of endlessly debating the filter with those who dont understand the wider ethical, moral and technical reasons on why its a bad idea. The center piece of their argument is "it stops you downloading childporn from www.kiddytown.com". If you're against that then you're as bad as a child molester. Around and around the argument goes and no matter how many well based points, researched articles or IT professional blogs you gently push them towards, it just comes down to "gotta protect them kids."

    We're tried being nice and polite, no one listens. Either way no one is listening. I'm looking forward to running in the street laughing once the general populace work out what they've signed up for. A big fat "I told you so" from the entire IT industry would be in order.

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
  4. Re:LIES! by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed - but the surveyed people are naturally assuming that the filter would actually work. They are giving their opinions on a magical hypothetical filter that would block 100% of illegal content, block 0% of legitmate content, resulted in no slowdown of internet access speeds, and that could not be abused or misused by future governments.

    If such a filter existed, then hell, even ~I~ would tentatively support it. So when a non-technical person is simply asked "would you like illegal websites blocked", then no wonder 80% of people say yes. But in the ~real world~, that can't be done without other negative effects and potential risks.