Gillard speaks out on the filter
Summary: New Prime Minister Julia Gillard today said she understands concerns about the government's controversial mandatory internet filtering policy, but said that Communications Minister Stephen Conroy was putting in an effort to get the policy into shape.
New Prime Minister Julia Gillard today said she understands concerns about the government's controversial mandatory internet filtering policy, but said that Communications Minister Stephen Conroy was putting in an effort to get the policy into shape.
"Well look, I know that there is some concern here, and I believe that the minister, Senator Stephen Conroy, has been trying to work through to get a resolution," she said in an interview with ABC Darwin's Julia Christensen.
"We obviously want a fast internet that meets people's needs, that's why we're rolling out the National Broadband... But there's also a set of concerns about the dark side of the new technology, if I can use that expression," she said.
"Clearly you can't walk into a cinema in Australia and see certain things, and we shouldn't on the internet be able to access those things either. So, Stephen Conroy is working to get this in the right shape."
When asked if she was comfortable with the filter given people's comparisons of Australia with China's internet policies, Gillard said that she was happy with the "policy aim".
"You're not able to go to the movies and see those kinds of things. Why should you be able to see them on the internet? I think that that's the kind of, you know, moral, ethical question at the heart of this.
"But I understand that there's a set of technical concerns about internet speed, and also concerns that somehow this accidentally doesn't move into taking away legitimate use of the internet."
The comments represent the first time Gillard has commented publicly on the filter policy since winning the Labor leadership several weeks ago.
Her predecessor Kevin Rudd had publicly defended the policy several times, on one occasion noting he would not apologise for the policy.
Labor Senator Kate Lundy has previously said she believes the change in leadership could present an opportunity for the policy to change, and is lobbying the Labor caucus to insert opt-in or opt-out provisions into the filter legislation. But Communications Minister Stephen Conroy did not respond directly when asked last week whether he had spoken to Gillard about Lundy's amendments.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
The difference is in expectation. I don't expect to see "anything" at the movies. I expect to see what the cinemas have chosen to screen.
With the Internet, I expect to have access to whatever is there - unfiltered.
Like most parents, I'm capable of protecting my children from inappropriate content.
I do NOT want some web illiterate bureaucrat - or anyone else- deciding what I can and can't view on the Internet.
(A) fund police to investigate, seize or close the cinema company.
(B) Build a wall in-front of the cinema and tell nobody whats behind it.
(C) Redirect the transport system with fake signs so that people cant find the cinema.
(D) B & C
The government seems pretty fond of option D.
I do not think only "RC material" will be blocked, as evident by the multiple leaked ACMA Blacklists that WikiLeaks posted a few months back.
There needs to be an intervention, an intervention to stop the Governments problem - trying to control every aspect of our view of the world.
Magazines are insulting advertising, promoting, in most cases, materialism and an anorexic perception of beauty
They got the newspapers completely locked down, I mean seriously, they print the damn things the night before
The MSM (main stream media) is under COMPLETE CONTROL of the network heads, who in turn themselves are under control...
When it comes down to it... in the world of government and information, we, the people, the citizens, are the bottom feeders.
We are fed whatever the Anchor is told to feed us..
The Anchor is fed what the producer is told to feed them..
The producer is fed what the studio executive is told to feed them...
The executive is fed what the director(s) is told to feed them...
the director(s) is/are fed what the chairman or parent head company rep is told to feed them...
and it goes on and on...
Until you get to the seat of power - the upper most you can go in the Elite oligarchy whom control the world through government, banking & socialised media - where you will find the true rulers of this planets current social system.
It is not the poli's people... they work for someone else... even the PM... it doesnt matter... because the fact is, the RBA is a private institution, who answer to noone, not even the government, as the government is in debt to them...
Educate yourselves, this is complete disregard for Human Rights charter right to Freedom of Speech, the people in power need to be reminded they work for THE PEOPLE, not the corporations
Now Prime Minister Julia Gillard wants to back that lie and continue it.
I had high hopes for her but it seems that she is willing and more than happy to lie about policies to suit their own agenda. She does not deserve mine or anyone elses vote.
Now I'm certainly not advocating child pornography, but there are already laws in place to deal with these kind of things. It is already illegal to produce or own or sell this material, there are already laws in place designed with the specific purpose of protecting people, adding further censorship over the top of this goes too far. Censorship does not prevent the creation or distribution of this type of material. I'm sure if tomorrow they said there was no need to get any material classified that would be no increase in child pornographic material. So why would the government think the opposite would be true?
1. Who is responsible for overseeing the accuracy of their list?
2. What contigencies have they made for mistakenly blocking legitimate sites and ruining someones business? (this happened during the testing)
3. What will be the reaction when parents (who were feeling more secure) find out that the filter only blocks them and not their children (because even 8 year old kids will learn how to circumvent this at school)?
But would Abbot be any different?
The Libs are simply refusing to tell us where they stand on the filter. We hear rumblings of discontent from some Lib pollies (as we do with some Labor). But as mentioned elsewhere, the Libs current position is (from their website) -
"The Coalition isn’t convinced that mandatory filtering will be effective. Let’s see independently audited filtering trial results, and hear from experts in the field before deciding".
So no, yes, maybe...? Funny that they would say the Coalition though... as it has been claimed by other posters elsewhere, that the Libs Coalition partner, the Nats, have apparently said they are "against the filter". So this is contradictory info to cloud everything further...Although one would assume that what ever Abbott wants, Abbott will get and the Nats will have to like it or lump it regardless...!
There would have been a lot less legitimate opposition had the government concerned themselves with only filtering child pornography. But due to this government bundling child pornography under a wide umbrella refered to as Refused Classification. The public are of course dubious of the governments true intentions toward filtering child porn.
The so called 'political masters' know that the public do not want the internet filtered. But those elected to represent us ignore the public will. Seems to me the loyalty to their chosen political party consistantly puts them at odds to their electorates will. Since it matters not what major political party is elected in this regard. I do not know what to propose as a solution. Vote Independent is my best advise.
I think the best solution is to fund interpol correctly and shutdown child porn sites worldwide. And keep shutting them down as they appear. Perhaps ISP's worldwide can/should fund this from their profits.
The politicans justify their obscene salarys by claiming to be the best people to do the job. Claiming similar positions in the public sector would attract even higher wages. The public sector wouldnt put up with the way politicians waste time and money.
Senator Conroy has wasted 3 years of public funding on this stupidity. How much longer are we going to let him waste or time and money and most importantly OUR REPUTATION in the worldwide IT community.
If you live in Victoria.. Send a real message to the faceless ones.. Put Senator Steve LAST on the ballot.
We know how much Liberal or Labor care about that. -No decent funding for policing, or enough child protection workers. No real attempt to force the churches to cough up their pedophile priests and change their policies to prevent repetitions in the future. No investigation of Scientology or the Exclusive Brethren.
But censor the internet? Sounds just like what we need!
Put a wall around it so the citizens can't see what is happening.
Except the purveyors of child abuse don't use normal URLs. There is almost no chance of "stumbling across" this stuff. Protect our kids? Since when is anyone under 18 going to search for this appalling material.
Conroy has already said the (any) government can add whatever they want to the lists if they see a need. I can vote for a party other than liberal or labor if I see a need. I definitely see this need. Goodbye, Conroy.
How can somebody justify regulating and controlling what a person views in their own home with the exception of Child pornography. The concept is unreasonable and will leave Australians with the information they view online controlled and censored by the government of the day; overtime the ideas and values that individuals hold will become manipulated by government.
1. Agreed - filter is stupid
2. Disagree - for many reasons outlined at ZD, previously...
3. Disagree - refer again to 1. which makes Conroy so disliked.. and 2. which is debatable, depending upon your own personal interests and political leanings (I have none, unlike others here)...
But having instigated the NBN and tamed Telstra, although obviously nowhere near as comms savvy as either Turnbull or Lundy, Conroy is a vast improvement on Coonan, Alston and the previous would be, whats-his-name Smith, imo...!