Australian Government Green Lights Internet Censorship

The Federal Government in Australia is introducing an internet filter that will block access to sites containing obscene and criminal content — think child sex abuse, sexual violence, bestiality, detailed tutorials on how to commit crimes and other things that are most likely found in the Anarchist’s Cookbook. The Huffington Post reports that such material is already banned from Australian sites, but the government has no control over its access on servers overseas.

The reasoning behind such censorship? Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says, “The Government believes that parents want assistance to reduce the risk of children being exposed to such material.” Conroy also believes that some internet content is just not appropriate for civilized society.

There’s still democracy at play though. An independent body, not the Australian Government, will determine what sites will be blacklisted (or in Australian, “rated RC for refused classification“). I suppose that is enough time before the papers and legalities are pushed through Parliament next year… then another 12 months before implementation.

Legislation will require all internet service providers to filter these sites.

Australia is definitely not the first to implement internet censorship. The Associated Press mentions how “countries such as Egypt and Iran impose strict Internet controls, and bloggers have been imprisoned.” AP also mention voluntary filters in Canada, Sweden and Britain. And through three weeks of frustrating, restrictive browsing while vacationing in China, I know from personal experience that China implements filters as well.

Experienced by a trial conducted earlier this year, Conroy has hopes for success. “Our pilot, and the experience of ISPs in many western democracies, shows that ISP level-filtering of a defined list of URLs can be delivered with 100 percent accuracy,” he says. He also proclaims the “negligible impact on internet speed.” Then again, Conroy admits “the government has always maintained there is no silver bullet solution to cyber-safety.”

NoCleanFeed.com pushes for action against Conroy’s filtering. “We can bring about a policy change,” the site announces. Australian Comedian Chas Licciardello (@ChasLicc) asks his followers, “After the [government] censors the Internet, how will we be able to describe the acts that should be done to Conroy?” Other Twitterers are also replying in farce, many via a #nocleanfeed tag.

The Sydney Morning Herald’s reader poll has readers overwhelmingly against Conroy’s filter. Over 90% of its readers believes that the policy violates their freedom.

Would this ever happen in the United States? AP did mention that Pennsylvania briefly tried to impose certain filters for child pornography sites, but a federal court took them down. What are your thoughts on this issue? Do you agree with Conroy? Share your opinions with us – hit that comment link!

Share